The Jews as a Problem for Modern European Political Logic

Author(s):  
Dan Michman
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Mark Neocleous

AbstractThis article unearths the political logic of the police kettle. Rather than add to the mundane debate about civil liberties or models of policing, this article argues that the kettle reveals nothing less than the police war at the heart of modernity. This is a police war carried out as a logic of containment against the enemy within—within the kettle and within society. The kettle is a microcosm of the police war of containment.


2010 ◽  
Vol 25 (64) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mikkel Birk Jespersen

Mikkel Birk Jespersen: "Utopiens grænser i Den amerikanske revolution - Om utopiske tekststrategier i Common Sense og Letters from an American Farmer"AbstractMikkel Birk Jespersen: “Boundaries of Utopia in the American Revolution: On Utopian Text Strategies in Common Sense and Letters from an American Farmer”The article discusses the relations between utopia, literature and revolution in the American Revolution through an analysis of Tom Paine’s Common Sense (1776) and J. Hector St. John de Crèvecoeur’s Letters from an American Farmer (1782). It is arguedthat utopia constitutes a textual function whose ‘non-place’ or ‘point zero’ is not reducible to a political logic, but rather presents a challenge to it. In the revolution, however, the different logics of utopia and of the political can be said to confront each other, hereby illuminating the contradictions of both. The constellation of the two texts brings out the contradictory nature of utopia, as the texts have opposed approaches to the revolution and are characterised by two different utopian logics.


Wealth ◽  
2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jedediah Purdy

Inequality, as Jeffrey Winters reminds us, is very old— indeed, so far, perennial. Democracy is rather arrestingly new, mass democracy especially so. It is an increasingly common perception that economic inequality must be brought under control for democracy to realize, or recover, its potential. The argument developed here suggests something further: that robust democracy is necessary if wealth is to realize its potential for social benefit. Indeed, democracy must be able to intervene in the definition, creation, distribution, and use of wealth precisely to make the benefits of wealth real. A political scheme of social provision, and political limitations on the scope of inequality, are the most plausible means to prevent growing wealth from undercutting its own benefits. This idea is not extremist: it simply states the logic of the mid-century social-democratic accommodation that established a measure of security and a pattern of widely shared economic growth. It does, however, insist on the priority of that political logic. The free play of the market will not deliver the goods that market-led growth in wealth is conventionally celebrated for producing. Only democracy can do that.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document