Introduction.- Conclusions.- Chronology.- Political activities of Barlow.- Political writings of Barlow.- An evaluation.- Bibliography.- Appendix: The conspiracy of kings, by Joel Barlow.

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? (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Journal of the History of Ideas 61.4 (2000) 617-634 [Access article in PDF] Edmund Burke and Reason of State David Armitage Edmund Burke has been one of the few political thinkers to be treated seriously by international theorists. 1 According to Martin Wight, one of the founders of the so-called "English School" of international theory, Burke was "[t]he only political philosopher who has turned wholly from political theory to (...) international theory." 2 The resurgence of interest in Burke as an international theorist has not, however, generated any consensus about how he might be classified within the traditions of international theory. Wight variously divided thinkers into trichotomous schools of Realists, Rationalists, and Revolutionaries, Machiavellians, Grotians, and Kantians, or theorists of international anarchy, habitual intercourse, or moral solidarity; 3 more recent international theorists have refined or supplemented these categories to construct similar trinitarian traditions of Realism, Liberalism, and Socialism, and of Empirical Realism, Universal Moral Order, and Historical Reason. 4 Burke's place within any of these traditions remains uncertain. Debate over whether he was a realist or an idealist, a [End Page 617] Rationalist or a Revolutionist, has concluded variously that he was a "conservative crusader" or an "historical empiricist," a belated dualist or a Cold Warrior before the fact, or, most egregiously, "a proto-Marxist, or more precisely proto-Gramscian" theorist of hegemony. 5 The fact that Burke so obviously eludes definition may put in doubt the analytical utility of closely-defined "traditions" of international theory. 6Burke's relationship to conceptions of reason of state provides a more precise example of the confusion within such taxonomies. According to one recent historian of international theory, Burke "laid the foundations" of the "conservative approach to International Relations informed by the two modern notions of state interest and necessity, by raison d'état"; however, in the words of another, "Burke... was vehemently opposed to the idea of Reason of State and did not subscribe to the view that national interests override moral laws." 7 The assumptions on which each of these judgments rests are clearly incompatible: on the one hand that a "conservative approach" in the realm of foreign affairs implies an espousal of reason of state defined as the primacy of "state interest and necessity," that Burke did indeed acknowledge; on the other hand that reason of state is defined more exactly as "the view that national interests override moral laws" and that Burke did not hold such a view, so could not be defined as a reason-of-state theorist. It might of course be possible that Burke held various views on such matters at various points in his long literary and political career or that he argued for differing conceptions of reason of state in differing contexts. To test such a hypothesis demands a historical account of Burke's relationship to the theories of reason of state held by his contemporaries and predecessors. [End Page 618]To place Burke within traditions of reason of state might seem to be a simple category error. After all, he famously scorned "dashing Machiavellian politicians," deplored "the odious maxims of a Machiavellian policy," condemned "the dreadful maxim of Machiavel that in great affairs men are not to be wicked by halves," and identified the Discorsi as the inflammatory textbook of French republicanism. 8 His strictures on Machiavelli and Machiavellianism affirmed avant la lettre the classic modern account of reason of state offered by Friedrich Meinecke, which counterposed "raison d'état on the one hand, and ethics and law on the other" and traced the emergence of this separation to the heathen Florentine who had given the tradition its familiar nickname. 9 Such accounts of reason of state and of Machiavelli reinforced the long-standing interpretation of Burke as the last of the medieval theorists of natural law, for whom no merely human calculations of advantage or interest could override the dictates of divine reason. If reason of state represented the doctrine that political expediency should supersede moral law, then Burke could only have been its (and Machiavelli's) enemy: his "politics... were grounded... (shrink)

The author submits that Popper's social philosophy rests on seven pillars: rationality (both conceptual and practical), individualism (ontological and methodological), libertarianism, the nonexistence of historical laws, negative utilitarianism ("Do no harm"), piecemeal social engineering, and a view on social order. The first six pillars are judged to be weak, and the seventh broken. In short, it is argued that Popper did not build a comprehensive, profound, or even consistent system of social philosophy on a par with his work in epistemology. (...) Still, he did make some important contributions to the field, such as unveiling the philosophical roots of totalitarianism and defending social engineering against both revolutionists and conservatives. (shrink)

Karl Marx and the Anarchists examines Marx's disputes with the anarchist theoreticians he encountered at various stages of his career as a revolutionist. Marx's attacks on Stirner, Proudhon, and Bakunin are shown to be of vital importance to the understanding not only of the subsequent enmity between Marxists and anarchists, but also of Marx's own interpretation of revolutionary politics.

December 6, 1963, marked 150 years since the birth of Nikolai Platonovich Ogarev . Ogarev was one of the first in the group of Russia's best sons who, in the dark years of reaction under the serf system, became forerunners of the revolution. Ogarev was distinguished for his diverse gifts and many-sided activity. He was a revolutionist — the organizer of the secret Land and Freedom [Zemlia i Volia] society — and also became known as a lyric poet. He was (...) one of the founders of the free Russian press, an original philosopher with a materialist outlook, a penetrating student of Russia's economic life, a passionate propagandist of polytechnical education, a proponent of freedom for oppressed peoples, and a spokesman for new esthetic ideals. Prerevolutionary historiographers neglected to take account of Ogarev's work, and, at best, recognized him as a "fellow-traveler" of Herzen. Only in the Soviet period did Nikolai Platonovich Ogarev obtain the recognition he deserved. (shrink)

Marx, if we look beyond the standard misrepresentations of his work, remains a highly intriguing author, together with Engels the main figure of a major revolution in the social sciences which challenges all the established practices and conventional wisdoms of the academia. His work has hardly ever been of more relevance than in the present period of world capitalism and its unfolding worldwide crises. First and foremost we need Marx as the author of a critique of modern capitalism, the economics, (...) the politics, the ideology and social structures of bourgeois society, which is still unsurpassed in its depth and scope. Regarding the present crisis, his analysis of the making of the world market and his analysis of the follies and fictions of capitalist high finance is more necessary than ever before for anyone eager to comprehend the turmoil we are in. Second, we still need Marx as a paragon of the indispensable critique of utopias, false hopes and political illusions, both left and right, both reformist and revolutionist. Last but not least, we need him as the masterthinker of the possible, of capitalism’s futures and its aftermaths. (shrink)

The moral reinterpretation of Jesus conducted by Kant, Lessing and Feuerbach, is an interesting matter when it comes to the philosophy of religion. The abovementioned German philosophers claimed that Jesus ought to be understood only as a moral archetype and a revolutionist in morality. This concept arose on the grounds of moral religion which was one of the most interesting ideas of the Enlightenment. Thus, exploring this moral reinterpretation of Jesus is just an excuse to study the concept of moral (...) religion. Despite the fact that this idea is no longer current, it has immense influence on the contemporary philosophy of religion. Therefore, understanding the concept of moral religion can broaden the context of the contemporary discussion. (shrink)

Marxists are committed to the elimination of exploitation of man by man. But they also believe that, for long stretches of history, exploitation is historically necessary. These two claims are in practical tension. As Engels would have it, this tension causes 'the leader of an extreme party' attempting premature revolution to be 'irrevocably lost'. This brief note argues against a Marxist attempt to alleviate this tension and sketches the moral predicament of revolutionists faced with it. Historical materialism entails a (...) pantragic view of history. (shrink)

Nietzsche and Shaw are famous and infamous: famous for their innovative and influential forms of writing, but infamous for their apparent support of totalitarianism and Nazism. However, while it has long been shown that Nietzsche’s provocative language about “breeding” and “masters and slaves” was intended to enhance culture through competition, it is still an open question how and when Shaw supported biological eugenics. Via Nietzsche’s “philosophical breeding,” this article presents a new reading of Shaw’s Man and Superman: on the one (...) hand, it contrasts Nietzsche’s philosophical Übermensch with Shaw’s eugenic Superman; and on the other hand, it connects Nietzsche’s agonistic enhancement of culture with Shaw’s philosophical reflections in “Don Juan in Hell.” In contrast to Tanner’s support of eugenic breeding in his Revolutionist’s Handbook, Shaw’s Don Juan remarkably resembles Nietzsche’s notion of “philosophical breeding” toward a more competent, truthful, and autonomous orientation that is needed in increasingly complex global politics. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:370 HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY Leibniz. By Edmondo Clone. (Napoli : Libreria scientifica editrice. Pp. 540. L.4.000.) L'ouvrage d'E. Cione est une presentation d'ensemble de l'oeuvre de Leibniz. L'auteur situe d'abord Leibniz dans son milieu culturel et dans son ambiance historique. Puis il aborde les probl~mes relatifs ~ la monade et ~ l'univers. Une troisi~me partie traite du choix divin, du real et des possibles. La quatri~me s'attache au difficile (...) probl~me de la liberte~ en Dieu et dans l'homme. Enfin, Clone precise queles sont et doivent ~tre les activite~s de l'homme dans los domaines de la logique, de la morale, de l'esth~tique, de la religion. Par consequent, ne serait-que par l'ampleur des mati~res ~tudi~es, on dispose ici d'une vaste fresque qui met en place l'ensemble des preoccupations philosophiques de Leibniz, et qui d~ploie son ~ventail en un certain sens, disons celui de la Monadologie, toute entree dans la philosophie de Leibniz ~tant bonne, pourvu, si j'ose dire, qu'on en sorte. Or, on en sort, car l'au~eur appuie ses connaissanc~s sur une pratique quotidienne des ~extes de Leibniz, sur une documentation de premiere main qui lui fair honneur, sur une somme de lectures [eibniziennes qui l'aident s orienter son dessein. Cet ouvrage repose sur l'humus fertile d'un vaste savoir technique et livresque concernant la philosophic de Leibniz. I1 est donc, de ce point de vue, document~ avec pr4cision, et il atteint le fond des probl~mes abord4s. Enfin, rauteur ne perd pas ses propres droits dans cette ~tude, et pr4cise d'un oeil vigilant quelles sont es d4fectuositds de cette pens4e, qui n'a sa pleine signification que si on ne la coupe pas de sos racines th4ologiques. I1 semble que lh, le destin de Leibniz diff~re de celui de Clone, puisque, pour ce dernier, le philosophe d'Hanovre ne parvient pas ~ p4n~trer le sens profond de la r~alit(~ spirituelle, c'est-h-dire de la libert4 de l'homme. ANDRE ROBINET Orldans, France David Hume: Prophet o] the Counter-Revolution. By Laurence L. Bongie. (Oxford University Press, 1965. Pp. xvii + 182.35s.) This excellent work uncovers and analyzes the amazing influence of Hume's historical and political views on the world of late 18th-century France. First Professor Bongie admirably recounts the immense impact of Hume's History o] England in France when it originally appeared. The work was wildly praised by French royalty, by the philosophes, by Catholic intellectuals, by almost everyone except the Huguenot exiles. Hume's alleged impartiality and philosophical approach made him for France of the time, the finest historian of the age, the new Tacitus. Everyone found great profundity in the History, and each group managed to overlook those aspects of Hume's views that conflicted with their own outlook, and stressed those aspects that fitted in with their own predilections. it was Turgot who apparently first realized that Hume was not the zeal hero of those who were to transform France, and that Hume's political philosophy and his picture of human nature "glean'd" through the study of history were hardly in accord with the theories of the reformers and the future revolutionists. In their correspondence, Hume and Turgot revealed the enormous gulf that separated them, the latter believing in the endless perfectibility of mankind, the former, much more sceptical and much readier to accept man in his historical condition. For Hume, there was always a struggle between order and liberty, and dangers on both sides with no ideal solution in sight, while for the optimistic Turgot a new and better world was just around the corner. What Turgot saw as their differences became clearer a few years later to moderates like Mirabeau, Mably and Brissot. Hume, for them, did not really see the importance of liberty, the fundamental rights of man, the real lessons of History. The moderates began boosting, translating and commenting on an antidote to Hume's History, the liberal Whig version of English history by Catherine Macaulay-Graham, a work finally published in French under Mirabeau... (shrink)

The author of the article discusses the great variety of the visions of the figure of God and the heaven in the revolutionary poetry between 1918 and 1939. God, the religion, the church or the synagogue were the symbols of the social oppression and the injustice or, on the contrary, the figure of God, especially Christ, was created as the most significant revolutionist and the symbol of the new, communist order. The article offers a presentation of many revolutionary, atheistic lyrics, (...) which connect communist ideology with Jewish or Christian religious symbols. It is focused on the former futurists’ poetry (by Aleksander Wat, Bruno Jasieński, Anatol Stern) and the lyrics by the communist propagandists of the inter-war epoch. (shrink)

This article reads Carlyle as a reader of Goethe to recover why he proclaimed Goethe as the `benignant spiritual revolutionist' of modernity and `first of the moderns'. As Goethe's first major English translator, Thomas Carlyle was also arguably the first to grasp the nature and purpose of Goethe's project to interpret modernity as a revolutionary epoch involving changes in consciousness, culture and material development. For Carlyle, Goethe's Faust presents modern consciousness and culture from the side of elegy - as the (...) search by an old man for eternal youth and an infinite world without constraints involving tragic loss. Wilhelm Meisters Lehrjahre, by contrast, presents the same processes from the side of romantic quest, that is, from the perspective of a youth growing into adulthood, as looking into the future with infinite hope. Finally in Wilhelm Meisters Wanderjahre, Carlyle discerns that the radical form of this novel as a discontinuous narrative that embodies movement, change and incompletion enables Goethe to represent the social conditions of moderns as a spiritual challenge and historic achievement. Carlyle's critical perspicacity is evident not least in his choice of Goethe's works to translate as much as his own essays on Goethe's place in modern European letters. In his close reading of Goethe, Carlyle captures the symbolic form of modernity as incorporating three levels of revolutionary transformation of individual consciousness, of culture and of modernity as mythic condition consisting of tragic development, creative destruction and perpetual movement and change. Moderns then are challenged to become authors of their own texts and lives. Carlyle contrasts Goethe's achievement against other primary candidates for the title of modern spiritual revolutionist in ironically Goethean terms: Napoleon (Prometheus), Byron (Faust and Young Werther) and Voltaire (Mephistopheles). Thereafter, the older Carlyle puts aside his critical readings of Goethe to become his own Goethean authority on the modern condition, most notably in his most famous books, Sartor Resartus, The French Revolution, Chartism, On Heroes, and Past and Present. By reading Carlyle as a reader of Goethe we can begin to discern that Carlyle was not only an historian, biographer and political commentator of his own place and times but a critical theorist seeking to interpret the modern epoch, with and beyond Goethe. (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to offer a case study of the readaptation of moral ideas as they pass from one social environment to another. Otherwise stated, it is a study of the formation of what is sometimes called an "operational code" by the rejection, modification, or semiconscious retention of current moral ideas for use in a situation very different from that in which the ideas originated. Specifically the purpose is to take some moral ideas as they appear in (...) a few great Russian novels and plays—literary works that everyone reads—and to note how these, or their opponent counterparts, appear when restated by Lenin. For Lenin created the code of the Russian revolutionist, and he used moral ideas current in Russian literature, though his purpose was to remake the society in which that literature was produced. The terms used in the title were purposely chosen: "ethics" to refer to maxims or rules or concepts of behavior as it should be; "Bolshevism" to refer to a generation now extinct or well on the road to extinction. The study is intended to have philosophical rather than literary significance, for it is meant to illustrate characteristics of ethical language. (shrink)

As in other countries, Einstein has been one of the most famous scientists in China. In 1970’s, the three volumes Collection of Einstein in Chinese have been selected, translated and published, which was the main sources for Chinese people knowing Einstein for long time, and even had important ideological influence. However, as the background of it, in China, there were very influential political movements related to criticism of science after 1949, which also influenced the decision, selection, progress and the way (...) of the translating and publishing of Einstein’s works. Among the editors and translators, XU Liangying was a special and important person, who was originally a underground revolutionist before establishment of the Republic, and latterly became a historian of science. He spent nearly ten years to finish the most translation when he was a real peasant in countryside and a “righty” because of the “anti-righty“ movement. During the translating work and the publication of Collection of Einstein in that special social, cultural and political context then, there were many things worth to look back and analyze their meanings by a historical perspective reflection. Especially, the ideological symbolic implication related to the Einstein has been a very dominant characteristic in the history mentioned here. (shrink)

Saudi Arabia in Transition is a collection of works by scholars from various backgrounds who have carried out in-depth research on one of the most obscure countries in terms of its cultural identity and political system. Since the Arab Uprising which started in 2011, countries in the Middle East have had to look into the mirror and reformulate their claim to legitimacy. While Saudi Arabia did not have the same revolutionist fervour as did its neighbours to the east and west, (...) it cannot escape pockets of rising dissent in its own community. While this book was published in 2015, it may provide important insights into how Saudi Arabia is changing, and more importantly, provide a background to help understand the direction and pace of reform that is undertaken by Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman who has been the de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia since 2017. (shrink)