Challenging intellectual hierarchies. Hegel in Risorgimento political thought: an introduction

ABSTRACT

The introduction to this special issue rethinks Italy’s liberal tradition and nineteenth-century Italian political thought in transnational perspective, with particular focus on the role of Italian Hegelianism during the emergence of the modern Italian nation state. Starting from an attempt to recast the transnational dimension of the Risorgimento, this co-authored article relates existing studies of Italian Hegelianism to wider trends in intellectual history elsewhere in Europe. Introducing the different contributions to this special issue, our approach challenges notions of centre and periphery in the history of intellectual flows, and helps to free the history of the Risorgimento from self-incurred exceptionalism.     

Tracking democracies: Italy and Japan in historical perspective

Abstract

The Italian and Japanese roads toward democracy have been paved by external forces, by the timing of economic development, by ‘great’ leaders and by such factors as institutions, class structure, geography and even by accident. In finding a pair of countries where so much is similar, and yet where fundamental differences penist, comparativists have fertile ground in which to look for key factors in political (and democratic) change. This article, in short, takes aim at illuminating these factors by distinguishing between the structural and cultural conditions within which democratic tracks were laid in Japanese and Italian history. It concludes that a closer examination of leadership and agency is necessary to explain more fully democratic development in Italy and Japan.     

Balance of Power and Political Equilibrium: A Response

This article analyses the international thought of the US sinologist and political advisor Owen Lattimore (1900–89). A well-known expert on China and the Far East, Lattimore was a ‘public intellectual’ and advisor to Chiang Kai-shek and Franklin D. Roosevelt. In 1950, after Senator Joseph McCarthy accused him of Soviet espionage, Lattimore's reputation was irrevocably damaged and his political thought forgotten. By assessing his visions of global democracy and geopolitics, this article claims Lattimore made insightful contributions to international thought. On the eve of the cold war, Lattimore's ideas of pluralistic democracy and tripolar world order offered an alternative vision of the post-war era, focusing on political participation and diversity. This article focuses on Lattimore's published writings in the 1940s, when, as political advisor and director of the Johns Hopkins’ Page School of International Relations, he sought to shift international attention from Europe to the Far East as the potential birthplace of a new version of post-colonial democracy. A fervent anti-imperialist, Lattimore crafted new political space for global democracy in a post-imperial age. His thoughtful discussion of participation, co-operation, democracy, knowledge, and pluralism make his vision of world order an interesting contribution to international thought in the twentieth century.     

Legacy Underplayed or Ignored? Tsietsi Mashinini: The Forgotten Warrior of South Africa's Liberation Struggle

Tsietsi Mashinini symbolises youth resistance to racism and imperialism after he heroically led the June 16 1976 Soweto student uprisings that defied South Africa's apartheid government. Subsequently, the United Nations condemned apartheid as a crime against humanity, but Tsietsi became a political exile at the tender age of 19. In exile, he formed the South African Youth Revolutionary Council (SAYRCO) together with his comrades from the Soweto Students Representative Council (SSRC) that was banned by Pretoria in 1977 along with numerous other organisations. Ironically, Tsietsi's individual and collective legacy is underplayed or ignored in contemporary South Africa. His illustrious role has only grudgingly been recognised long after South Africa achieved liberal democracy in 1994. Yet Tsietsi's heroism and legacy inspired the students that he led when confronting the apartheid system. Like Tsietsi, thousands left the country to join the anti-apartheid liberation struggle. Thus, his activities remain etched deeply in their minds whenever they reflect on his legacy annually during the 1976 uprising's anniversary, now called Youth Day. Others put increasing pressure on apartheid at home until it relinquished power through negotiations. This article examines Tsietsi Mashinini's legacy and his contribution to South Africa's freedom struggle based on a review of the literature, historical records and media reports, theoretical reflection guided by Rational Choice Theory and Game Theory, and an analysis of the awards given to freedom struggle stalwarts and other South African luminaries. It concludes with observations on Tsietsi Mashinini's legacy, with the author's contention that his legacy—underplayed or ignored—will forever haunt post-1994 South Africa's democracy.     

民主与独裁论战背后的非学理因素

民主与独裁论战背后有很多复杂因素,其中关于一个领袖的争论是非学理因素,也就是说,这场争论的重心已经由学理上的要民主还是要独裁转移到了中国有没有可以独裁的人、由谁独裁、这个人有没有独裁的能力的现实政治问题,非学理因素与学理因素纠扯在一起,使得不同知识分子群体表现出复杂的心理取向。五四以降,政统上的秩序危机与学统上的意义危机之间存在着较大的张力,尽管本文所选取的对象在对现存政府的合法性——道统的认可是有某种程度的共识的,但对于一个领袖谁来做的不同看法则反映出他们对于解决意义危机的犹疑之态,从而也表现出民国思想界道统、政统与学统之间错综复杂的关系。     

SOCIALIST COMMUNICATION STRATEGIES AND THE SPRING OF 1917

The Russian Revolution of 1917 presented Swedish Social Democrats with a dilemma: how could they use the transnational revolutionary momentum to further universal suffrage, without supporting actions possibly leading to violence? In striking this balance, the use of communications was central. This article uses the concept of the media system to analyse the communicative practices and strategies developed by the Party in the early 20th century, and how these were employed between 1915 and 1917, in relation to the hunger marches and revolutionary pressures. The study shows that the Party had established conscious agitation strategies and an elaborate national communication structure, which enabled coordinated opinion activities. As early as 1915, the Party began using these tools to initiate a national opinion movement concerning the food situation. In 1917, faced with the combination of events in Russia and erupting hunger marches, the Party leadership chose to emphasize security and stability, focusing on events the Party could control, such as the 1 May demonstrations. The resulting development of revolutionary opinion in Sweden during the spring of 1917 and the ensuing political changes reflected conscious media management strategies by the Left, who used the media system to navigate and shape a transnational revolutionary moment.     

1. CARL SCHMITT BETWEEN HISTORY AND MYTH

Carl Schmitt's work defines the history and theory of political myth. But analyzing it represents a challenge to historians and theorists alike. For many historians, Schmitt should be analyzed in his own context, whereas theorists study his writings without enough consideration of the specific context in which he conceived his texts. In this essay, I argue that Schmitt not only contributed to the fascist glorification of the mythical and its novel enactment as the driving force of fascism, but he also represents one of the most intriguing and influential interpreters of the political theory of myth, challenging in turn theories of democracy and the role of reason and secularism in historiography.     

Hegel on the World-historical

The article considers the development and the diversity of the understandings of the Norman Conquest in Jacobean England. In 1603, James VI of Scotland ascended the throne of England, and one of his first policies to unify the two kingdoms culminated in failure in face of English opposition. Modern historians have demonstrated that at the heart of this quick collapse lay a constitutional struggle—the English fear of the loss of their sovereignty. Taking this as the vantage point, the article examines a number of historical publications composed by English lawyers in the following decade. The Jacobean period witnessed a significant proliferation of historical literature, and modern historians have stressed that English common lawyers staunchly adhered to a belief in the ancient constitution, a belief in the antiquity of English law that was counter to royal policies. The article demonstrates how the Union debate, despite its eventual collapse, produced unparalleled interest in the meaning of conquest in the 1610s. It also considers the works of civil lawyers in comparison. By comparing the differing accounts of the Norman Conquest, the article ultimately demonstrates the contested nature of James's kingship in England.     

政治民主是东西方学者的共同话题--南京"各国议会制度研究国际学术讨论会"综述

“各国议会制度研究国际学术讨论会”有三个论题。第一个论题为当代西方国家的议会民主制．来自西方的学和中国学提交了一批报告,论及19世纪以来欧洲国家议会制度的发展以及当代西方议会民主制的某些局限性,第二个论题是当代中国的乡村村民自治改革．中国学提交了一批论,讨论了中国宪法中关于村民自治的条款以及村民自治个案研究的结果,第三个论题是西方民主制的起源问题。中国学提交了一批报告,涉及西方城市自治传统、中世纪议会制对近代民主制的作用等。与会中外代表一致认为,民主是中西方学共同努力的目标和中西方学、政治家共同关心的课题。     

Hegel and the Paradox of Democratic Education

This article explores Hegel’s Philosophy of Right as a work on education that responds to two democratic ideals: the ideal of individual integrity, which demands that individuals come to know the principles that animate them of their own accord, and the ideal of collectivism, which demands that individuals be at home in a shared world. While the great political works of Plato and Rousseau fasten on one of these ideals at the expense of the other, I show that Hegel’s political philosophy accepts both. The result is what I call the paradox of democratic education. Hegel solves this paradox through a three-fold pedagogical strategy which speaks to the transformational possibilities of institutions as well as more directly to the needs of the “ironic consciousness.” This strategy reveals a Hegel who calls on us to strengthen our commitment to a democratic polity through a deeper conception of the requirements of democratic education.     

Historicism and constructionism: rival ideas of historical change

ABSTRACT

A seemingly unitary appeal to history might evoke today two incompatible operations of historicization that yield contradictory results. This article attempts to understand two co-existing senses of historicity as conflicting ideas of historical change and rival practices of temporal comparison: historicism and constructionism. At their respective births, both claimed to make sense of the world and ourselves as changing over time. Historicism, dominating nineteenth-century Western thought and overseeing the professionalization of historical studies, advocated an understanding of the present condition of the human world as developing out of past conditions. Constructionism, dominating the second half of the twentieth century, understood the present condition as the recent invention of certain ‘historical’ environments, without prior existence. As competing ideas of historical change, they both entail a comparison between past and present conditions of their investigated subjects, but their practices of temporal comparison are irreconcilable and represent two distinct ways of historicization.     

New Historicism: Postmodern Historiography Between Narrativism and Heterology

In recent discussionsof the work of new historicist critics like Stephen Greenblatt and Louis Montrose, it has oftenbeen remarked that the theory of history underlying their reading practice closely resembles thatof postmodern historiographers like Hayden White and Frank Ankersmit. Taking off from onesuch remark, the aim of the present article is twofold. First, I intend to provide a theoretical basisfrom which to substantiate the idea that new historicism can indeed be taken to be the literary-critical variant of what Frank Ankersmit has termed the "new historiography." Inthe second half of the article, this theoretical foundation will serve as the starting point of afurther analysis of both the theory and practice of new historicism in terms of its distinctlypostmodern historiographical project. I will argue that in order to fully characterize the newhistoricist reading method, we do well to distinguish between two variants of postmodernhistoricism: a narrativist one (best represented in the work of Michel Foucault) and aheterological one (of which Michel de Certeau's writings serve as a supreme example). Abrief survey of the two methodological options associated with these variants (discursive versuspsychoanalytical) is followed by an analysis of the work of the central representative of newhistoricism, Stephen Greenblatt. While the significant use of historical anecdotes in his workleaves unresolved the question to which of either approaches Greenblatt belongs, the distinctiondoes serve a clear heuristic purpose. In both cases, it points to the dangerous spot where the newhistoricism threatens to fall prey to the evils of the traditional historicism against which it defineditself.