This paper takes aim at contemporary conceptions of liberal democracy and the accompanying loss of faith with liberal democratic theory which may be observed. There exist problems with procedure, outcomes, and the decline of universality in the face of liberal nationalism which only serve to reinforce boundaries. The clearest cases of these problems have arisen in the United States over the past few years, and especially since the events of September 11, 2001.

This essay focuses on the danger of complicity. American philosophers, given their country’s hegemonic position, exert global influence; what form should it take? Comparison is made with the situation of France when it still controlled Algeria. French philosophers, until near the time of Algerian independence, generally accepted and sometimes profited from this extremely unjust situation. An important exception was Sartre, particularly in his Preface to Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth. It is argued that elements of complicity with American global (...) dominance, some of the more unjust aspects of which are listed, are to be found in such widely read philosophers as Rawls and Rorty. It is suggested that a rethinking of the problem of evil, in its political and not just its religious aspects, is in order. Finally, a broader view of what ‘American philosophy’ means, including, for instance, the voices of African American and Native American philosophers, is urged. (shrink)

This book comprises a selection of William McBride's essays on theory and practice in the former Yugoslavia, 1989 - 1999. It continues the critical assessment of neoliberal globalization from the vantage point of its effects on East-Central and Southern Europe that McBride presented in Philosophical Reflections. Unlike the earlier book, it situates discussions of globalization and neonationalist wars against the backdrop of the history, development, and demise of Praxis Philosophy — the one-time bridge between the progressive forces (...) of former Yugoslavia and various East-West initiatives. (shrink)

John Wild, phenomenology in America, and the origins of SPEP Content Type Journal Article Pages 281-284 DOI 10.1007/s11007-011-9194-5 Authors William L. McBride, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, USA Journal Continental Philosophy Review Online ISSN 1573-1103 Print ISSN 1387-2842 Journal Volume Volume 44 Journal Issue Volume 44, Number 3.

"The conception of 'lived experience' marks my change since L'Etre et le Néant ... L'Etre et le Néant is a monument of rationality. But in the end it becomes an irrationalism, because it cannot account rationally for those processes which are 'below' consciousness and which are also rational, but lived as irrational. Today, the notion of 'lived experience' represents an effort to preserve that presence to itself which seems to me indispensable for the existence of any psychic fact, while at (...) the same time this presence is so opaque and blind before itself that it is also an absence from itself."1. (shrink)

The unfinished, posthumously published second volume of Jean-Paul Sartre's Critique of Dialectical Reason consists for the most part of a study of the evolution of the Soviet Union under the reign of Stalin. Essentially, Sartre sees this history as amounting to a lengthy deviation from the goal of socialism, a deviation that he regards as thoroughly intelligible in light of social and historical circumstances. Some ten years after abandoning his work on this book, on the occasion of the Soviet invasion (...) of Czechoslovakia, Sartre concluded that this ‘deviation’ was permanent. At the same time, Sartre believed, as he had stated already in Volume I of the Critique, that the post-Stalinist era must be characterized as ‘One World’, a historical turning away from the plurality that had prevailed in all of past human history. The present essay attempts to capture Sartre's approach to history as ongoing ‘totalization’ – conflict-filled, subject to contingency and chance and the frequent occurrence of ‘holes’, and nevertheless intelligible. Although Stalin died many decades ago, and the Soviet Union itself no longer exists as such, it is argued here that Sartre's approach in this book is very useful as a key to the present time. Future history is indeed unpredictable, but Sartre's techniques of historical analysis remain valid. It is also contended, more controversially, that today the ideal of democracy may be in the process of following the path of socialism in the direction of permanent deviation. (shrink)

From the very beginning of his explicitly political thinking until the end of his life, Jean-Paul Sartre was always cognizant of the fact that the typical electoral system, whether dominated by two or by several "parties," that is to be found in Western countries and that is vaunted as the pinnacle of real democracy amounted to a profound mystification. That is why, at the time of the centenary of his birth, he is owed a renewed respect for his ideas in (...) this area. I do not intend to examine here the evolution of Sartre?s political thought, or even his views with respect to the Eastern European countries, the "socialism" of which, as he eventually discovered, was scarcely more real than their "democracy." Rather, I shall confine myself to recalling certain elements, especially certain iconoclastic elements, of that thought. I shall do so with a view to taking a clear-headed look at a possible future in which those icons will have disappeared. (shrink)

The article is devoted to the North American Sartre Society, which was founded in 1985. The author as its co-founder develops his point of view presenting during panel discussion of Sartre’s relations with the United States on the 2015 meeting. He devoted a lot of papers and books to Sartre’s philosophy. Some of them are presented in the references. The author reflects at a somewhat deeper level on Sartre’s attitudes towards USA in the context of its history and international relations, (...) saying about philosopher’s contradictions, the strategy and tactics of his self-disinvitation. The author traces Sartre’s transition from one myth of America to another in later life. Sartre’s initial experiential encounter with the American reality was by no means entirely positive, but he did like New York City, feeling a sense of freedom in the midst of its crowds that he retained as an important part of his picture of America when back in France. Freedom, an open future, almost unlimited possibilities, and a lack of a sense of history of the sort by which Europe is shackled. Several events of the postwar world history such as Korean war, then Vietnam war paved the way for Sartre’s most salient later attitudes towards America. Meanwhile, Sartre had accepted an invitation to present lectures at Cornell University in 1965. But after American massive bombing of North Vietnam in 1965 Sartre responded by disinviting himself from Cornell by way of protest. Recounting these events, the author of the paper recalls so-called “Cornell Lectures”, which were saved in unfinished manuscript form and have been given the title “Morale et Histoire”. A serious interest in American political life is shown on Sartre’s and Beauvoir’s visit to Cuba as guests of Fidel Castro and Sartre’s participation in Lord Bertrand Russell’s independent War Crimes Tribunal. (shrink)

This paper takes aim at contemporary conceptions of liberal democracy and the accompanying loss of faith with liberal democratic theory which may be observed. There exist problems with procedure, outcomes, and the decline of universality in the face of liberal nationalism which only serve to reinforce boundaries. The clearest cases of these problems have arisen in the United States over the past few years, and especially since the events of September 11, 2001.

The paper begins by raising some doubts concerning the appropriateness of the phrase, ”after Marxism,” despite current sociological realities which point to its accuracy. It then discusses a certain “pathology” that may be intrinsic to the combined theory and practice of political philosophy; some examples are offered. Next, it is suggested that the discourse of contemporary European political philosophy suffers from the absence of certain Marxian notions, especially that of ideology. Some current trends---postmodernism, nationalism, critical theory, and religious thought---are then (...) briefly explored. It is contended that none of them by itself is adequate for developing the kind of global worldview which, malgré tout, seems needed to counteract the increasing hegemony of the “Coca-Cola cuIture” of the present day. The paper concludes by raising questions about the possible role, at best an awkward one, of American philosophers in this enterprise. (shrink)

The paper begins by raising some doubts concerning the appropriateness of the phrase, ”after Marxism,” despite current sociological realities which point to its accuracy. It then discusses a certain “pathology” that may be intrinsic to the combined theory and practice of political philosophy; some examples are offered. Next, it is suggested that the discourse of contemporary European political philosophy suffers from the absence of certain Marxian notions, especially that of ideology. Some current trends---postmodernism, nationalism, critical theory, and religious thought---are then (...) briefly explored. It is contended that none of them by itself is adequate for developing the kind of global worldview which, malgré tout, seems needed to counteract the increasing hegemony of the “Coca-Cola cuIture” of the present day. The paper concludes by raising questions about the possible role, at best an awkward one, of American philosophers in this enterprise. (shrink)

The chorus of doubts concerning the continued viability of the Western liberal tradition itself, in both ideational and institutional aspects, has grown much louder over the past several years. Can this tradition be said to be in a time of twilight – that time that falls? It is this question that would be explored in this paper. While searching the confirmation of the position, indicated in the title of the paper, author turns to contemporary ideological sources of Western liberalism. Such (...) concepts as capitalism, socialism, justice, democracy are considered in this context based on the works of two thinkers, John Rawls and Fred Dallmayr. By stressing ideal justice and ignoring concrete injustice, Rawls’ ideas seem strange even apart from the present crisis. The subsequent evolution of his thoughts is estimated by the author as the transition from daylight to twilight. It has manifested in Rawls’ refusal to apply his principles of justice to the international arena, his condescending attitude toward underdeveloped countries. The atmosphere of The Law of Peoples is still redolent of the assumption of American hegemony. The author wishes to extract from Dallmayr’s book for present purposes is above all his commitment to a version of socialism. But what neither Dallmayr nor Rawls and other liberal thinkers will gainsay is that central to the twilight zone in which we are wandering is the heavy hand of global capitalism. The next problem is that the modern liberal democratic theory has always professed to make the assumption of equality, but it has never fully embraced it. The most important conceptual element in accounting for this failure is the notion of majority rule. The author mentions three difficulties with the idea of majority rule: the problem of time and the problem of the identity of the human units who compose the majority, and the problem of information. He analyzes the recent political evolutions of both the United Kingdom and the United States, and France as well, which have certainly given Western liberalism a badname in many quarters. (shrink)

Les failles dans la théorie de la démocratie libérale ont été toujours localisées dans au moins deux sphères importantes : celle de la procédure et celle des résultatst. En ce qui concerne la première, le problème réside dans le fait que l’on tâche que «la volonté du peuple» – ou du moins celle du peuple pertinent, des électeurs éligibles – s’exprime à travers des mécanismes signifiants et pratiques. Suivant le consenus partagé jusqu’à récemment par la plupart des théoriciens orthodoxes de (...) la démocratie libérale, les élections à des cops représentatifs et les votes ultérieurs des gagnants de ces élections constituent de tels mécanismes. Or, on constate à tout bout de champ que différentes instances des pouvoirs élus agissent à l’encontre de l’opinion des groupements de personnes qui les ont élus. La théorie de la démocratie libérale dit que, tant que l’on respecte les procédures appropriées permettant l’expression majoritaire de la volonté du peuple quant à ceux qui le représenteront, les représentants sont légitimés à voter contre la volonté apparente du peuple. Or, c’est une pure condradiction pratique. En ce qui concerne la question des résultats, la théorie récente de la démocratie libérale s’est creusé là une fosse encore plus profonde en abandonnant le concept de bien commun, auquel souscrivaient du moins quelques-uns des théoriciens plus traditionnels. La théorie de la démocratie libérale a finalement renoncé à toute fonction critique à l’égard des résultats. Par contre, elle est obligée de ratifier tout résultat, quelque déplorable ou même tragique qu’il puisse être, tant qu’il soit le produit de l’ensemble habilité des procédures et des institutions admises. Or, la nouvelle orientation théorique devra s’attaquer à tous les éléments qui sont absents dans l’approche rawlsienne et dans les écrits de la plupart des disciples libéraux de Rawls : pouvoir, violence, domination, idéologie, décision, interprétation, expression politique, révolution, histoire, économie, biopolitique. On a désespérément besoin de nouveaux modèles opour la philosophie sociale et politique! (shrink)

L’article constitue un examen critique de la crise du règne de la loi dans le contexte politique actuel aux Etats-Unis. Le texte cite quelques exemples de la politique nationale et internationale américaine en rapport avec le « culte de la démocratie ». L’article se divise en deux parties. La première se penche sur, dans l’ordre : l’attitude officielle des Etats-Unis vis-à-vis de la législation internationale, ensuite vis-à-vis du pouvoir de l’institution de la présidence et enfin vis-à-vis du rôle de la (...) Cour suprême. La seconde partie examine quelques conséquences philosophiques de la politique américaine, liées aux questions de la démocratie et du règne de la loi. (shrink)

The issue that I wish to address is, why protest and criticize the increasing hegemony of what has been called the “culture of consumerism”? This “why not?” objection encompasses three distinct sets of questions. First, is not resistance to it akin to playing the role of King Canute by the sea? Second, is not acceptance of it dictated by the current liberal philosophical consensus that acknowledges and endorses an inevitable diversity in different individuals’ conceptions of what is good, and must (...) not this consensus itself be taken as a given by all who are opposed to political and religious totalitarianisms? Third, does not cosmopolitanism, regarded as a value-orientation favorable to the dissolution or at least minimization of national boundaries and the practices of exclusivity associated therewith, make common cause in the present historical conjuncture with this same trend? I will argue for a “No” answer to all of these questions. (shrink)

Theoretisch befanden sich die falschen Linien in der Theorie der liberalen Demokratie schon immer an mindestens zwei wichtigen Stellen: im Prozess oder Prozedere und im Resultat. Was das Erste betrifft, so bestand das Problem darin, dass versucht wurde sicherzustellen, dass der „Wille des Volkes“ – oder zumindest der der relevanten Menschen, der wählbaren Wähler – durch anschauliche, praktische Mechanismen zum Ausdruck kommt. Entsprechend dem Konsens der bedeutendsten Theoretiker der liberalen Demokratie in der neueren Vergangenheit gelten als solche Mechanismen die Wahlen (...) für Repräsentativorgane und die nachfolgenden Stimmen der Wahlsieger. Doch auf jedem Schritt stoßen wir auf Instanzen der gewählten Regierungen, die die Mehrheitsansichten desselben Personenkreises, von dem sie ursprünglich gewählt worden waren, preisgeben. Die Theorie der liberalen Demokratie besagt, dass solange angebrachte Verfahren zum Ausdruck des Willens der Mehrheit angewandt werden im Hinblick darauf, wer sie vertreten soll, die Vertreter berechtigt sind, gegen den manifesten Willen des Volkes zu stimmen. Doch dies ist natürlich ein offensichtlicher Widerspruch. Was die Frage der Resultate betrifft, so hat sich die neueste Theorie der liberalen Demokratie eine noch tiefere Grube gegraben, da sie sich vom Begriff des Allgemeinwohls abgewandt hat, zu dem zumindest einige frühere Theoretiker in dieser Tradition standen. Die Theorie der liberalen Demokratie hat sich letztlich selbst jegliche kritische Funktion in Bezug auf die Resultate abgesprochen. Statt dessen ist sie gezwungen, jedes Ergebnis zu ratifizieren, ohne Rücksicht darauf, wie offensichtlich es irreführend oder sogar tragisch sein mag, solange es das Erzeugnis einer akzeptierten autoritativen Bündels von Verfahren und Institutionen ist. Eine neue theoretische Richtung wird sicherlich gegen alle Elemente ankämpfen müssen, die größtenteils im Rawlsschen Ansatz und den Schriften der meisten seiner liberaldemokratischen Mitläufer fehlen: mit Macht, Gewalt, Domination, Ideologie, Entschlüssen, Deutungen, politischem Ausdruck, Revolution, Geschichte, Ökonomie, Biopolitik. Was wir dringend brauchen, sind neue Modelle sozialer und politischer Philosophie! (shrink)