the promise - wordpress.com · the promise of politics on the family and conceived in the image of...

THE PROMISE+++ OF +++

POLITICS

Hannah Arendt

Edired and with an Introductionby Jerome Kohn

SCHOCKEN BOOKS, NEW YORK

CONTENTS

IntroductionbyJeromeKohn

vii

Socrates

TheTraditionofPoliticalThought

4 0Montesquieu'sRevisionoftheTradition

63

From

HegeltoMarx

70

TheEndofTradition

8,

IntroductionintoPolitics

93

Epilogue

201

Index

205

INTRODUCTIONINTOPOLITICS

I

WhatIsP

olitics?

Politicsisbasedonthefactofhumanplurality.Godcreatedman,

butmenareahuman,earthlyproduct,theproductofhuman

namre.Becausephilosophyandtheologyarealwaysconcerned

with

man,becausealltheirpronouncementswouldhecorrectif

therewereonlyoneortwomenoronlyidenticalmen,theyhave

foundnovalidphilosophicalanswertothequestion:Whatispoli-

tics?Worsestill,forallscientificthinkingthereisonlyman-in

biology,orpsychology,asinphilosophyandtheology,justasin

zoologythere isonlythelion.Lionswouldbeofconcernonlyto

lions.Whatisremarkableamongallgreatthinkersisthedifferencein

rank

betweentheirpoliticalphilosophiesandtherestoftheir

works--even

inPlato.Theirpoliticsneverreachesthesame

depth.Thislackofdepthisnothingbuta

failuretosensethe

depthsinwhichpolitics isanchored.

Politicsdealswiththecoexistenceandassociationof

different

men.Menorganizethemselvespoliticallyaccordingtocertain

essentialcommonalitiesfoundwithinor

abstracted

from

anabsolutechaos ofdifferences.Aslongaspoliticalbodiesarebased

93

-_...----------

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

onthefamilyandconceivedintheimageofthefamily,kinshipin

allitsdegreesiscreditedontheonehand

asbeingabletounite

extremeindividualdifferences,and,ontheotherhand,asameans

bywhichgroupsresemblingindividualscanbeisolatedandcon-

trasted.

Inthisform

oforganization,anyoriginaldifferentiationis

effectivelyeradicated,inthesamewaythattheessentialequality

ofallm

en,insofaraswearedealingwith

man,isdestroyed.The

downfallofpoliticsinbothdirectionshasitsoriginintheway

politicalbodiesaredevelopedoutofthefamily.Herewehave

ahintof

whatbecomessymbolic

intheimageof

theHoly

Family-namelythatGodcreatednotjustmanbutthefamily.

Totheextentthatweregardthefamily

asmorethanparticipa-

tion,thatis,theactiveparticipationofaplurality,webegintoplay

God, byactingasifwecouldnaturallyescapetrom

theprinciple

ofhumandifferentiation.Insteadofengenderingahumanbeing,

wetrytocreatemaninourownlikeness.

Butinpractical,politicalterms,thefamily

acquiresitsdeep-

rootedimportancefrom

thefactthattheworldisorganizedin

suchawaythatthereisnoplacewithinitfortheindividual,and

thatmeansforanyonewho

isdifferent.Familiesarefoundedas

sheltersandmightyfortressesinaninhospitable,alienworld,into

whichwewanttointroducekinship.Thisdesireleadstothefun-

damentalperversionof

politics,becauseitabolishesthebasic

qualityofplurality,orratherforfeitsitbyintroducingtheconcept

ofkinship.

Man,asphilosophyandtheology

know

him,exists-Oris

realized-inpoliticsonlyintheequalrightsthatthosewhoare

mostdifferentguaranteeforeachother.Thisvoluntaryguarantee

of,andconcessionto,aclaimoflegalequalityrecognizestheplu-

ralityofmen,whocanthankthemselvesfortheirplurality

and

thecreatorofmanfortheirexistence.

94

IntroductionintoPolz'n.'cs

Therearetwogoodreasonswhyphilosophyhasneverfounda

placewherepoliticscantakeshape.The

firstistheassumption

thatthereissomethingpoliticalinmanthatbelongstohisessence.

Thissimplyisnotso;manisapolitical.Politicsarisesbetween

andsoquite

outsideof

man.Thereisthereforeno

realpolitical

substance.Politicsarisesinwhatlieshetweenmenandisestab-

lishedasrelationships.Hobbesunderstoodthis.

ThesecondisthemonotheisticconceptofGod,inwhoselike-

nessmanissaidtohavebeencreated.Onthatbasis,therecan,

ofcourse,beonlyman,whilemenbecomeamoreorlesssuccess-

fulrepetitionofthesame.Man,createdinthelikenessofGod's

solitariness,liesatthebasisoftheHobbesian

"stateofnature"

asa"warofallagainstall."Itisthewarof

rebellionofeach

againstalltheothers, who

arehatedbecausetheyexistwithout

meaning-withoutmeaning

forman

createdinthelikenessof

God'saloneness.

The

West's

solutionforescaping

from

theimpossibilityof

politicswithintheWesterncreationmythistotransformpolitics

intohistory,ortosubstitutehistoryforpolitics.Intheideaof

worldhistory,themultiplicityofmenismeltedintoonehuman

individual,whichisthenalsocalledhumanity.Thisisthesource

ofthemonstrous

andinhuman

aspectof

history,which

first

accomplishesitsfullandbrutalendinpolitics.

Itissodifficulttocomprehendthatthereisarealminwhichwe

canhetrulyfree,thatis,neitherdrivenhyourselvesnordepen-

dentonthegivensofmaterialexistence.Freedom

existsonlyin

theuniqueintermediaryspaceofpolitics.Weescapefrom

this

freedomintothe"necessity"ofhistory.Aghastlyabsurdity.

Itcouldbethatthetaskofpoliticsistoestablishaworldas

transparentfortruthasGod'screationis.IntermsoftheJudeo-

Christianmyth,thatwouldmeanman,createdinthelikenessof

God,hasreceivedtheprocreativeenergytoorganizemenintothe

95

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

likenessof

divine

creation.Thisisprobablynonsense.Butit

wouldbethe onlypossibledemonstrationof,andjustificationfor,

theconcept ofnaturallaw.

God'screationoftheplurality

ofmen

isembodied

inthe

absolutedifferenceofallmenfrom

oneanother,whichisgreater

thantherelativedifferenceamongpeoples,nations,orraces.But

inthatcase,thereisinfactnoroleforpolitics.Fromtheverystart,

politicsorganizesthosewhoareabsolutelydifferentwithaview

totheirrelativeequalityandincontradistinctiontotheirrelative

differences.*

II

PrejudiceAgainstPoliticsand

What,

inFact,P

oliticsIsToday

Anytalkofpoliticsinourtimehastobeginwiththoseprejudices

thatallofuswhoaren'tprofessionalpoliticianshaveagainstpoli-

tics.Oursharedprejudicesarethemselvespoliticalinthebroadest

sense.Theydonotoriginateinthearroganceoftheeducated,are

nottheresultofthecynicismofthosewhohaveseentoomuch

andunderstoodtoolittle.Becauseprejudicescropupinourown

thinking,wecannotignorethem,andsincetheyrefertoundeni-

ablerealitiesandfaithfullyreflectourcurrentsituationprecisely

initspoliticalaspects,wecannotsilencethem

with

arguments

4

Theseprejudices,however,arenotjudgments.Theyindicatethat

wehavestumbledintoasituationinwhichwedonotknow,ordo

notyetknow,how

tofunctioninjustsuchpoliticalterms.The

dangeristhatpoliticsmayvanishentirelyfrom

theworld.Our

*Denkt.agehuch.,August1910'

9"

IntroductionintoPolitics

prejudicesinvadeourthoughts;theythrowthebabyoutwiththe

bathwater,confusepoliticswithwhatwouldputanendtopolitics,

andpresentthatverycatastropheasifitwereinherentinthe

natureofthingsandthusinevitable.

Underlyingourprejudicesagainstpoliticstodayarehopeand

fear:thefearthathumanitycoulddestroyitselfthroughpolitics

andthroughthemeansofforcenowatitsdisposal,and,linked

withthisfear,thehopethathumanitywillcometoitssensesand

ridtheworld,notofhumankind,butofpolitics.Itcoulddo

sothroughaworldgovernmentthattransformsthestateintoan

administrativemachine,resolvespoliticalconflictsbureaucrati-

cally,andreplacesarmieswith

policeforces. Ifpoliticsisdefined

initsusualsense,asarelationshipbetweentherulersandthe

ruled,thishopeis,ofcourse,purelyutopian.Intakingthispoint

ofview,wewouldendupnotwiththeabolitionofpolitics,but

withadespotismofmassiveproportionsinwhichtheabysssepa-

ratingtherulersfrom

theruledwouldbe

sogiganticthatany

sortof

rebellion

wouldno

longerbepossible,nottomention

anyformofcontroloftherulersbytheruled.Thefactthatno

individual-nodespot,perse---<:ouldbe

identifiedwithinthis

worldgovernmentwouldinnowaychangeitsdespoticcharacter.

Bureaucraticrule,theanonymousruleofthebureaucrat,isno

lessdespoticbecause"nobody"exercisesit.Onthecontrary,itis

morefearsomestill,becausenoonecanspeakwithorpetitionthis

"nobody."

If,however,weunderstandpoliticstomeanaglobaldominion

inwhichpeopleappearprimarilyasactiveagentswholendhuman

affairsapermanencetheyotherwise donothave,thenthishopeis

nottheleastbitutopian.Though

ithasneverhappened

ona

globalscale,thereareplentyofhistoricalexamplesofpeople

beingshuntedasideasactiveagents--whetherintheform

of

97

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

whatseemstousold-fashionedtyranny,whetethewillofone

manisgivenfreerein,Ofinthemodernformoftotalitarianism,in

which

allegedhigher,impersonal"historicalforces"andpro-

cessesareunleashed,andhumanbeingsareenslavedto'theirser-

vice. Thenatureofthisformofdomination,whichinaprofound

senseistrulyapolitical,isevidentpreciselyinthedynamicwhich

itgeneratesandtowhichitispeculiar;adynamicinwhichevery-

thingandeveryoneregardedas"great"onlyjustyesterdaycan

andmust-ifthemovementistoretainitsmomentum-becon-

signedtoobliviontoday.Yetitcanhardlybeasourceofcomfort

amidsuchconcernsthatwearecompelledtonotehow,ontheone

hand,amongthepopulaceofmassdemocracies,asimilarimpo-

tenceisspreadingspontaneously,sotospeak,andwithoutanyuse

ofterror,while,ontheotherhand,a

similarpermanently

self-

perpetuatingprocessof

consumptionandforgettingistaking

root,evenifinthefree,unterrorizedworldthesephenomenaare

stilllimitedtothespheresofeconomicsorpoliticsinthenarroW

senseoftheword.

Butprejudicesagainstpolitics--theideathatdomesticpolicyis

afabricofliesanddeceptionswovenbyshadyinterestsandeven

shadierideologies,whileforeignpolicyvacillatesbetweenvapid

propagandaandtheexerciseofrawpower-reach

hackmuch

furtherthantheinventionofdevicescapableofdestroyingall

organiclifeonearth.Intermsofdomesticpolitics,thesepreju-

dicesareatleastasoldasparty-drivendemocracy-thatis,some-

whatmorethan

ahundredyears--which

forthefirsttimein

modernhistoryclaimedtorepresentthepeople,eventhoughthe

peoplethemselvesneverbelievedit.Asforforeignpolicy,wecan

probablyplaceits

originsinthosefirstdecadesof

imperialist

expansionattheturnofthecentury,whenthenation-statebegan,

not onbehalfofthenation,butratheronbehalfofnationalecO-

98

IntroductionintoPolitics

nomicinterests,toextend

European

ruleacrosstheglobe.But

whatgivesthewidespreadprejudiceagainstpoliticsitsrealforce

today-theflightintoimpotence,thedesperatedesiretobe

relievedentirelyoftheabilitytoact-wasinthosedaysthepreju-

diceandprivilegeofasmallclassthatbelieved,asLordActon

putit,that"powertendstocorrupt,andabsolutepowercor-

ruptsabsolutely."Perhapsnoonerecognizedmoreclearly

than

Nietzsche-inhisattempttorehabilitatepower-thatthiscon-

demnationof

powerclearly

reflected

theasyetunarticulated

yearnings ofthemasses,althoughhetoo,verymuchinthespirit

ofthetimes,identifiedorconfusedpower-whichnoindividual

caneverpossess,sinceitcanariseonlyoutofthecooperative

actionofmanypeople--with

theuseof

force,themeansof

which,tobesure,anindividualcanseizeandcontrol.

PrejudiceandJudgm

ent

Theprejudicesthatweshare,thatwetaketobeself-evident,that

wecantossoutinconversationwithoutanylengthyexplanations,

are,asalreadynoted,themselvespoliticalinthebroadestsenseof

theword-thatis,somethingthatconstitutesanintegralpartof

thosehumanaffairsthatarethecontextinwhichwegoaboUlour

dailylives.Thatprejudicesplaysuchalargeroleindailylifeand

thereforeinpoliticsisnotsomethingweshouldbemoanassuch,

orforthatmatterattempttochange.Mancannotlivewithout

prejudices,andnotonlybecausenohumanbeing'sintelligenceor

insightwouldsufficetoform

anoriginaljudgmentaboutevery-

thingonwhichheisaskedtopassjudgmentinthecourseofhis

life,butalsobecausesuchatotallackofprejudicewouldrequirea

superhumanalertness.Thatiswhyinalltimesandplacesitisthe

taskofpoliticstoshedlightuponanddispelprejudices,whichis

nottosaythatitstaskistotrainpeopletobeunprejudicedorthat

99

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

thosewhoworktowardsuchenlightenmentarethemselvesfree

ofprejudice.Thedegreeofalertnessandopen-mindednessina

givenepochdeterminesitsgeneralphysiognomyandthelevel of

itspoliticallife,butanepochinwhichpeoplecouldnotfallback

onandtrustrheirprejudiceswhenjudginganddecidingabout

majorareasoftheirlivesisinconceivable.

Obviouslythisjustificationofprejudiceasthestandardfor

judgmentineverydaylifehasitslimits. Itindeedappliesonlyto

genuineprejudices--thatis,tothosethatdonotclaimtobejudg-

ments.Genuine

prejudicesarenormally

recognized

bytheir

unabashedappealtotheauthorityof"theysay"or"theopinion

is,"althoughofcoursesuchanappealdoesnotneedtobeexplic-

itlystated.Prejudicesarenotpersonalidiosyncrasies,which,

howeverimmunetoproof,alwayshaveabasisinpersonalexpe-

rience,withinwhichcontexttheylayclaimtotheevidenceof

sensoryperception.Becausethey

existoutsideof

experience,

however,prejudicescanneverprovidesuchevidence,noteven

forthosewhoaresubjecttothem.Butpreciselybecausetheyare

nottiedtopersonalexperiencetheycancountonthereadyassent

ofothers,withoutevermakinganefforttoconvincethem.Inthis

respect,prejudicediffersfrom

judgment.Whatitshareswith

judgment,however,isthewayinwhichpeoplerecognizethem-

selvesandtheircommonality,sothatsomeonecaughtupinpreju-

dicescanalwaysbecertainofhavinganeffectonothers,whereas

whatisidiosyncratic

canhardlyeverprevailinthepublicand

politicalsphereandhasaneffectonlyintheintimacyofprivacy.

Consequently

prejudiceplaysamajorroleinthesocialarena.

Therereallyisnosocialstructurewhichisnotbasedmoreorless

onprejudicesthatincludecertainpeoplewhileexcludingothers.

Thefreerapersonisofprejudicesofanykind,thelesssuitablehe

willbeforthepurelysocialrealm.W

ithinthatrealm,however,

100

IntroductionintoPolitics

wedonotmakeanyclaimtojudge,andourwaivingofthatclaim,

Oursubstitutionofprejudiceforjudgment,becomesdangerous

onlyifitspreadsintothepoliticalarena,wherewecannotfunc-

tionatallwithoutjudgment,inwhichpoliticalthoughtisessen-

tiallybased.

Oneofthereasonsforthepoweranddangerofprejudiceslies

inthefactthatsomethingofthepastisalwayshiddenwithin

them.Uponcloserexamination,werealizethatagenuinepreju-

dicealwaysconcealssomepreviouslyformed

judgmentwhich

originallyhadits

ownappropriateandlegitimateexperiential

basis,andwhich

evolvedintoaprejudiceonlybecauseitwas

draggedthroughtimewithoutits

everbeingreexamined

orrevised.Inthisrespect,prejudicediffersfrom

meresmalltalk,

whichdoesn'tsurvivethedayorhourofourchatterandinwhich

themostheterogeneousopinionsandjudgmentswhirandtumble

likefragmentsinakaleidoscope.Thedangerofprejudiceliesin

theveryfactthatitisalwaysanchoredinthepast-souncom-

monlywell-anchoredthatitnotonlyanticipatesandblocksjudg-

ment,butalso

makesbothjudgmentandagenuineexperienceof

thepresentimpossible.Ifw

ewanttodispelprejudices,wemust

firstdiscoverthepastjudgmentscontainedwithinthem,whichis

tosay,wemustrevealwhatevertruthlieswithinthem.Ifweneg-

lecttodothis,wholebattalionsofenlightenedoratorsandentire

librariesofbrochureswillachievenothing,asismadeeminently

clearby

thetrulyendlessandendlesslyfruitlessefforts

todeal

withissuesburdenedwithancientprejudices,suchastheproblem

oftheJews,orofNegroesintheUnitedStates.

Becauseprejudiceanticipatesjudgment byharkeningbackto

thepast,itstemporaljustificationislimitedtothosehistorical

epochs-andinquantitativetermstheymakeup

thelion'sshare

ofhistory-inwhichthenewisrelativelyrareandtheolddomi-

10'

THEPROMISEOFPOL1TICS

natesthepoliticalandsocialfabric.Inourgenetalusage,theword

"judgment"hastwomeaningsthatcertainlyoughttobedifferen-

tiatedbutthatalwaysgetconfusedwheneverwespeak.First of

all,judgmentmeansorganizingandsubsumingtheindividualand

particularunderthegeneralanduniversal,therebymakingan

orderlyassessment byapplyingstandardsbywhichtheconcrete

isidentified,andaccordingtowhichdecisionsarethenmade.

Behindallsuchjudgmentsthereisaprejudgment,aprejudice.

Onlytheindividualcaseisjudged,butnotthestandarditselfor

whetheritisanappropriatemeasureofwhatitisusedtomeasure.

Atsomepointajudgmentwasrenderedaboutthestandard,but

nowthatjudgmenthasbeenadoptedandhasbecome,asitwere,a

meansforrenderingfurtherjudgments.Judgmentcan,however,

meansomethingtotallydifferent,andindeeditalwaysdoeswhen

weareconfrontedwith

somethingwhichwehave

neverseen

beforeandforwhichtherearenostandardsatourdisposal.This

judgmentthatknowsnostandardscanappealtonothingbutthe

evidenceofwhatisbeingjudged,anditssoleprerequisiteisthe

facultyofjudgment,whichhasfarmoretodowithman'sability

tomakedistinctionsthanwith

hisabilitytoorganizeandsub-

sume.Suchjudgmentwithoutstandardsisquitefamiliartous

from

judgmentsaboutaestheticsandtaste,which,asKantonce

observed,wecannot"dispute,"butcertainlycanargueoveror

agreewith.W

erecognizethisineverydaylifewhenever,insome

unfamiliarsituation,wesaythatthisorthatperson

judgedthe

situationrightlyorwrongly.

Ineveryhistoricalcrisis,itistheprejudicesthatbegintocrum-

blefirstandcanno

longerbereliedupon.Preciselybecause

withinthenonbinding

contextof

"peoplesay"

and"people

think";withinthelimitedcontextwhereprejudicesarejustified

andused,theycannolongercountuponbeingaccepted,they

l02

IntroductionintoPolitics

easilyossify,turningintosomethingthatby

naturetheymost

definitelyarenot-thatis,intopseudotheories,which,asclosed

worldviews orideologieswithanexplanationforeverything,pre-

tendtounderstandallhistoricalandpoliticalreality.Ifitisthe

functionofprejudicetosparethejudgingindividualfrom

having

toopen

himselfto,andthoughtfully

confront,everyfacetof

realityheencounters,thenworldviewsandideologiesaresogood

atthisthattheysomehow

shieldusfromallexperiencebymaking

ostensibleprovisionforallreality.Itisthisclaimtouniversality

thatsoclearly

distinguishesideology

from

prejudice,whichis

alwaysonlypartialinnature,justasitalsoclearly

statesthatwe

arenolongertorelyonprejudices-andnotonlyonthem,but

alsoonourstandardsofjudgmentandtheprejudgmentsbasedon

suchstandards-by

declaringthem

tobeliterallyinappropriate.

Thefailureofstandardsinthemodernworld-theimpossibility

ofjudginganew

whathashappenedanddaily

happens,on

the

basisoffirmstandardsrecognizedbyeveryone,andofsubsum-

ingthoseeventsascasesofsomewell-knowngeneralprinciple,

aswellasthecloselylinkeddifficultyofprovidingprinciplesof

actionforwhatshouldnowhappen-hasoftenbeendescribedas

anihilisminherentinourage,asadevaluationofvalues,asortof

twilightofthegods,acatastropheintheworld'smoralorder.All

such

interpretationstacitly

assumethathuman

beingscanbe

expectedtorenderjudgmentsonlyiftheypossessstandards,that

thefacultyofjudgmentisthusnothingmorethantheabilityto

assignindividualcasestotheircorrectandproperplaceswithin

thegeneralprincipleswhichareapplicabletothem

andabout

whicheveryoneisinagreement.

Granted,weknow

thatthefacultyof

judgmentinsistsand

mustinsistonmakingjudgmentsdirectlyandwithoutanystan-

dards,buttheareasinwhichthisoccurs-indecisionsofallsorts,

'eu

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

bothpersonalandpublic,andinso-calledmattersoftaste-are

themselvesnottakenseriously.Thereasonforthisisthatinfact

suchjudgmentsareneverofacompulsorynature,neverforce

othersintoagreementinthesenseofalogicallyirrefutablecon-

clusion,butrathercanonlypersuade.Moreover,theideathat

thereissomethingcompulsoryaboutsuchjudgmentsisitselfa

prejudice.Foraslong

asstandardsremaininforce,thereisno

compulsoryproofinherentinthem;standardsarebasedon

the

samelimitedevidenceinherentinajudgmentuponwhichweall

haveagreedandnolongerneedtodisputeorargueabout.The

onlycompulsoryproofcomesastheresultofourcategorizing,of

ourmeasuringandapplyingstandards,ofourm

ethodofordering

theindividualandconcrete,which,by

theverynatureofthe

enterprise,presumesthevalidityofthestandard.Thiscategoriz-

ingandordering,inwhichnothingisdecidedexceptwhetherwe

havegoneaboutourtaskinademonstrablycorrectorincorrect

way,hasmoretodowith

thinking

asdeductivereasoningthan

withthinkingasanactofjudgment.Thelossofstandards,which

doesindeeddefinethemodernworldinitsfacticity

andcannot

bereversedbyanysortofreturntothegoodolddaysorbysome

arbitrarypromulgationofnewstandardsandvalues,istherefore

acatastropheinthemoralworldonlyifoneassumesthatpeople

areactuallyincapableofjudgingthingsperse,thattheirfaculty

ofjudgmentisinadequateformakingoriginaljudgments,and

thatthemostwecandemandofitisthecorrectapplicationof

familiarrulesderivedfrom

alreadyestablishedstandards.

Ifthiswereso,ifhumanthinkingwereofsuchanaturethatit

couldjudgeonlyifithadcut-and-driedstandardsinhand,then

indeed

itwouldbe

correcttosay,asseemstobe

generally

assumed,thatinthecrisisofthemodernworlditisnotsomuch

theworldasitismanhimselfwho

hascomeunhinged.This

lO4

IntroductionintoPolitics

assumptionprevailsthroughoutthemillsofacademianowadays,

andismostclearlyevidentinthefactthatthehistoricaldisciplines

dealingwith

thehistoryof

theworldandofwhathappensin

itweredissolvedfirstintothesocialsciencesandthenintopsy-

chology.Thisisanunmistakableindicationthatthestudyofa

historicallyformedworldinitsassumedchronologicallayershas

beenabandonedinfavor ofthestudy,first,ofsocietaland,second,

ofindividualmodesofbehavior.Modesofbehaviorcannever

betheobjectofsystematicresearch,ortheycanbeonlyifone

excludesman

asanactiveagent,theauthorof

demonstrable

eventsintheworld,anddemoteshimtoacreaturewhomerely

behavesdifferentlyindifferentsituations,onwhomonecancon-

ductexperiments,andwho,onemayevenhope,canultimatelybe

broughtundercontrol.Evenmoresignificantthanthisargument

amongacademicfaculties,inwhich,tobesure,quiteunacademic

powerplayshavesurfaced,isasimilarshiftofinterestawayfrom

theworldandtowardman,evidencedintheresultsofarecently

circulated

questionnaire.The

responsetothequestion:What

givesyougreatestcauseforconcerntoday?wasalmostunani-

mous:man. Thiswasnot,however,meantinthemanifestsenseof

thethreattheatomicbombposestothehumanrace(aconcern

indeed

onlytoojustified);evidently

whatwasmeantwasthe

natureofman,whatevereachindividualrespondentmayhave

understoodthattobe. Inbothofthesecases--and

wecould,of

course,citeanynumberofothers-thereisnotamoment'sdoubt

thatitismanwhohaslosthisbearingsorisindangerofdoingso,

orwho,atanyrate,iswhatweneedtochange.

Regardlessofhowpeoplerespondtothequestionofwhether

itismanortheworldthatisinjeopardyinthepresentcrisis,one

thingiscertain:anyresponsethatplacesmaninthecenterof

ourcurrentworriesandsuggestshemustbechangedbeforeany

105

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

reliefistobefoundisprofoundlyunpolitical.Foratthecenter

ofpoliticsliesconcernfortheworld,notforman-aconcern,

infact,foraworld,howeverconstituted,withoutwhichthose

whoarebothconcernedandpoliticalwouldnotfindlifeworth

living.Andwecannomorechangeaworldbychangingthepeo-

pleinit--quiteapartfromthepracticalimpossibilityofsuchan

enterprise-thanwecanchangean

organizationoraclub

byattemptingtoinfluenceitsmembersinonewayoranother.Ifwe

wanttochangeaninstitution,anorganization,somepublicbody

existingwithintheworld, wecanonlyreviseitsconstitution,its

laws,itsstatutes,andhopethatalltherestwilltakecareofitself.

Thisissobecausewhereverhumanbeingscometogether-beit

inprivateorsocially,beitinpublicorpolitically-aspaceisgen-

eratedthatsimultaneouslygathersthemintoitandseparatesthem

from

oneanother.Everysuchspacehasitsownstrucrurethat

changesovertimeandrevealsitselfinaprivatecontextascus-

tom,inasocialcontextasconvention,andinapubliccontextas

laws,constitutions,statutes,andthelike.Whereverpeoplecome

together,theworldthrustsitselfbetweenthem,anditisinthisin-

betweenspacethatallhumanaffairsareconducted.

Thespacebetweenmen,whichistheworld,cannot,ofcourse,

existwithoutthem,andaworldwithouthumanbeings,asover

againstauniverse

withouthuman

beingsor

narurewithout

humanbeings,wouldbeacontradictioninterms.Butthisdoes

notmeanthattheworldandthecatastrophesthatoccurinit

shouldberegardedasapurelyhumanoccurrence,muchlessthat

theyshouldbereducedtosomethingthathappenstomanortothe

narureofman.Fortheworldandthethingsofthisworld,inthe

midstofwhichhumanaffairstakeplace,arenottheexpressionof

humannature,thatis,theimprintofhumannatureturnedout-

ward,but,onthecontrary,aretheresultofthefactthathuman

{06

IntroductionintoPolitics

beingsproducewhattheythemselvesarenot-thatis,things-

andthateventheso-calledpsychologicalorintellectualrealms

becomepermanentrealitiesinwhichpeoplecanliveandmove

onlytotheextentthattheserealmsarepresentasthings,asa

worldof

things.Itiswithinthisworldofthingsthathuman

beingsactandarethemselvesconditioned,andbecausetheyare

conditionedbyit,everycatastrophetbatoccurswithinitstrikes

backatthem,affectsthem.W

ecanconceiveofacatastropheso

monstrous,soworld-destroying,thatitwouldlikewiseaffect

man'sabilitytoproducehisworldanditsthings,andleavehimas

worldlessasanyanimaLWecanevenconceivethatsuchcatastro-

pheshaveoccurredintheprehistoric

past,andthatcertainso-

calledprimitivepeoplesaretheirresidue,theirworldlessvestiges.

Wecanalsoimaginethatnuclearwar, ifitleavesanyhumanlife

atallinitswake,couldprecipitatesuchacatastrophe bydestroy-

ingtheentireworld.Thereasonhumanbeingswillthenperish,

however,isnotthemselves,but,asalways,theworld,orhetter,

thecourseoftheworldoverwhichtheynolongerhavemastery,

from

whichtheyaresoalienatedthattheautomaticforcesinher-

entineveryprocesscanproceedunchecked.And

theaforemen-

tionedmodernconcernaboutmandoesnotevenaddresssuch

possibilities.Theawfulandftighteningthingaboutthatconcern

is,rather,thatitis notintheleastworriedaboutsuch"externali-

ties"andthusaboutultimaterealdangers,butescapesintoan

interiorwhereatbestreflectionispossible,butnotactionor

change.

Onecan,ofcourse,offerthefacileobjectionthattheworld,

aboutwhicbwearespeakinghere,istheworldofmen,thatitis

theresultofhumanproductivityandhumanaction,whateverone

mayunderstandthosetobe.Theseabilitiesdoindeedbelongto

thenatureofman;iftheyproveinadequate,mustwenotthen

{OJ

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

changethenatureofmanbeforewecanthinkaboutchangingthe

world?Atitscorethisisanancientobjectionthatcanappealto

theverybestofallwitnesses--toPlato,whoreproachedPericles

forhavinglefttheAtheniansnobetter offafterhisdeaththanthey

werebefore.

WhatIstheMeaningofPolitics?

Theanswertothequestionofthemeaningofpoliticsissosim

ple

andso

conclusivethatonemightthinkallotheranswersare

utterlybesidethepoint.Theansweris:Themeaningofpoliticsis

freedom.Itssimpliciryandconclusiveforcelienotinthefactthat

itisasoldasthequestionitself-whichofcoursearisesoutof

uncertaintyandisinspiredbymistrust-butintheexistenceof

politicsassuch.Todaythisanswerisinfactneitherself-evident

norimmediatelyplausible.Thisisapparentinthefactthatthe

questionnowadaysisnolongeronethatsimplyasksaboutthe

meaningofpolitics,aspeopleoncedidwhenpoliticsfirstarose

from

experiencesthatwereeitherofanonpoliticalorevenan

antipoliticalnature.Ourquestionnowadaysarisesoutofthevery

realexperienceswehavehadwith

politics;itisignitedby

the

disasterpoliticshaswroughtinourcenturyandthestillgreater

disasterthatthreatenstoemergefrom

politics.Ourquestionis

thusfarmoreradical,moreaggressive,andmoredesperate:Does

politicsstillhaveanymeaningatall?

Statedinthisway-and

bynowitisthewayitposesitselffor

everyone-the

questionresonateswith

twoimportantfactors:

First,ourexperiencewithtotalitariangovernments,inwhichthe

totaliryofhumanlifeisclaimedtobesototallypoliticizedthat

underthemthereisnolongeranyfreedomwhatsoever.Viewed

from

thisvantagepoint-andthatmeans,amongotherthings,

from

conditionsthatarespecificallymodern-thequestionarises

108

IntroductionintoPolitics

whetherpoliticsandfreedomareatallcompatible,whetherfree-

domdoesnotfirstbeginpreciselywherepoliticsends,sothat

freedomcannotexistwhereverpoliticshasnot yetfounditslimit

anditsend.Perhapsthingshavechangedsomuchsinceclassical

times,whenpoliticsandfreedomweredeemed

identical,that

now,undermodernconditions,theymustbedefinitivelysepa-

rated. Thesecondfactthatnecessitatesthequestionisthemonstrous

development ofmodernmeansofdestructionoverwhichstates

haveamonopoly,butwhichnevercouldhavebeendeveloped

withoutthatmonopolyandwhichcanbeemployedonlywithin

thepoliticalarena. Heretheissueisnotjustfreedom

butlifeitself,

thecontinuingexistenceofhumaniry

andperhapsofallorganic

life onearth.Thequestionthatarisesheremakesallpoliticsprob-

lematic;itmakesitappeardoubtfulwhetherpoliticsandthe

preservationoflifeareevencompatibleundermoderncondi-

tions,andits

secrethope

isthatpeoplemay

proveinsightful

enoughsomehow

todispensewithpoliticsbeforepoliticsdestroys

usall.Granted,onecanobjectthatthehopethatallstateswilldie

awayorthatpoliticswillvanishby

someothermeansisitself

utopian,andonecanassumethatmostpeoplewouldagreetothis

objection.Butthatinnowayaltersthehopeorthequestion.If

politicsbringsdisaster,andifonecannotdoawaywith

politics,

thenallthatisleftisdespair,orthehopethatwewon'thavetoeat

oursoupashotasitcomesoffthestOve--aratherfoolish

hopein

ourcentury,inasmuchassinceWorldWarI,everypoliticalsoup

we've

hadtoeathasbeen

houerthan

anycook

wouldhave

intendedtoserveit.

Both

theseexperiences-totalitarianism

andtheatomic

bomb-ignitethequestionaboutthemeaningofpoliticsinour

time.Theyarethefundamentalexperiencesofourage,andifwe

109

standthesituationandtakeintoaccounttheindividualfactors

thatthistwofoldthreatoftotalitarianstatesandatomicweapons

represents.-athreatonlymadeworsebytheirconjunction-we

cannotsomuchasconceiveofasatisfactorysolution,noteven

presumingthebestwillonallsides,whichasweknow

doesnot

workinpolitics,sincenogoodwilltodayisanysortofguarantee

ofgoodwilltomorrow.Ifweproceedfrom

thelogicinherentin

thesefactorsandassumethatnothingexceptthoseconditionswe

nowknow

determinesthepresent orfuturecourseofourworld,

wemightsaythatadecisivechangeforthebettercancomeabout

onlythroughsomesortofmiracle.

Toaskinallseriousnesswhatsuchamiraclemightlooklike,

andtodispelthesuspicionthathopingforor, moreaccurately,

countingon

miraclesisutterlyfoolish

andfrivolous,wefirst

havetoforgettherolethatmiracleshavealwaysplayedinfaith

andsuperstition-thatis,inreligions

andpseudoreligions.In

ordertofreeourselvesfrom

theprejudicethatamiracleissolely

agenuinelyreligiousphenomenonby

whichsomethingsuper-

naturalandsuperhumanbreaksintonaturalevents orthenatural

courseofhumanaffairs,itm

ightbeusefultoremindourselves

briefly

thattheentireframeworkof

ourphysicalexistence-

theexistenceoftheearth,oforganiclifeonearth,ofthehuman

speciesitself.-restsuponasortofmiracle.For,from

thestand-

pointof

universaloccurrencesandthestatisticallycalculable

probabilitiescontrollingthem,theformationoftheearthisan

"infinite

improbability."And

thesameholdsforthegenesisof

organiclifefrom

theprocessesofinorganicnature,ortheori-

ginof

thehuman

speciesoutof

theevolutionaryprocesses

oforganiclife.Itisclearfrom

theseexamplestbatwhenever

somethingnewoccurs,itburstsintothecontext ofpredictable

processesassomethingunexpected,unpredictable,andultimately

IntroductionintoPolitics

III

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

no

ignorethem,itisasifweneverlivedintheworldthatisour

world.Neverthelessthereisadifferencebetweenthetwo.Over

againsttheexperienceoftotalpoliticizationintotalitariangov-

ernmentsandtheresultantproblematicnatureofpolitics,we

muststilldealwith

thefacttbatsinceantiquity,no

onehas

believedthatthemeaningofpoliticsisfreedom;andwith

the

additionalfactthatinthemodernworld,hoththeoreticallyand

practically,politicshasbeenseenasameansforprotectinghoth

society'slife-sustainingresourcesandtheproductivityofitsopen

andfreedevelopment.Inresponsetothedubiousnessofpoli-

ticsasexperiencedundertotalitariangovernments,theremight

alsobeatheoreticalretreattoanearlierstandpointinhistorical

terms.-asifnothingprovidedbetterproofthantotalitariangov-

ernmentsofjusthowrighttheliberalandconservativethinking

ofthenineteenthcenturyhadbeen.Thedistressingthingabout

theemergencewithinpolitics ofthepossibilityofabsolutephysi-

calannihilationisthatitrenderssucharetreattotallyimpossible.

Forherepoliticsthreatenstheverythingthat,accordingtomod-

ernopinion,providesitsultimatejustification-thatis,thebasic

possibilityoflifeforallofhumanity.Ifitistruethatpoliticsis

nothingmorethan

anecessaryevilforsustaining

thelifeof

humanity,thenpoliticshasindeedbeguntobanishitselffromthe

worldandtotransformitsmeaningintomeaninglessness.

Thismeaninglessnessisnotsomecontrivedhurdle.Itisa

veryrealfact,whichwewouldexperienceeverydayifweboth-

erednotjusttoread

thenewspaperbutalso,outof

indigna-

tionatthemuddlethat'sbeen

madeofallimportantpolitical

problems,toposethequestionofhow,giventhissituation,things

mightbedonebetter.Themeaninglessnessinwhichpoliticsfinds

itself isevidentfrom

thefactthatallindividualpoliticalquestions

nowendinanimpasse.Nomatterhowhardwetrytounder-

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

causallyinexplicable-justlikeamiracle.Inotherwordsevery

newbeginningisbynatureamiraclewhenseenandexperienced

from

thestandpointoftheptocessesitnecessarily

interrupts.

Inthissense-thatis,withinthecontextofprocessesintowhich

itbursts-the

demonstrablyrealtranscendenceofeachbegin-

ningcorrespondstothereligioustranscendenceofbelievingin

miracles.

This,ofcourse,ismerelyanexampletohelpexplainthatwhat

wecallrealisalreadyawebwhichiswovenofearthly,organic,

andhumanrealities,butwhichhascomeintoexistencethrough

theadditionofinfiniteimprobabilities.Ifwetakethisexampleas

ametaphorforwhatactuallyhappensintherealmofhuman

affairs,itimmediatelypullsuplame.Fortheprocessesthatweare

dealingwithhereare,aswe'vesaid,ofahistoricalnature,which

meanstheydonotproceedaccordingtothepatternofnatural

developmentsbutaresequencesofeventswhosestructureisso

frequentlyinterspersedwithinfiniteimprobabilitiesthatanytalk

ofmiraclesseemsoddtous.Butthatissim

plybecausetheprocess

ofhistoryhasarisenoutofhumaninitiativesandisconstantly

interruptedbynewinitiatives. Ifweview

thisprocesspurelyas

process-whichis,ofcourse,whathappensinallphilosophies

ofhistoryforwhichtheprocessofhistoryisnottheresultof

menactingtogether,butofthedevelopmentandcoincidenceof

extrahuman,superhuman,orsubhuman

energies,from

which

man

astheactiveagentisexcluded-every

newbeginning,

whetherforgoodorill,issoinfinitelyimprobablethatallmajor

eventslook

likemiracles.Viewed

objectivelyandfrom

out-

side,theoddsinfavoroftomorrowunfoldingjustliketoday

arealwaysoverwhelming-andthus,inhumanterms,approxi-

mately,ifnotexactly,asgreatasthoseagainsttheearthdevel-

opingoutof

cosmicoccurrences,againstlifearisingoutof

112

1IntroductionintoPolitics

inorganicprocesses,orofman,thenonanimal,resultingfrom

the

evolutionofanimalspecies.

Thecrucialdifferencebetweentheinfiniteimprobabilitieson

whichearthlyhumanlifeisbasedandmiraculouseventsinthe

arenaofhumanaffairslies,ofcourse,inthefactthatinthelatter

casethere isamiracleworker-thatis,thatmanhimselfevidently

hasamostamazingandmysterioustalentforworkingmiracles.

Thenormal,hackneyedwordourlanguageprovidesforthistal-

entis"action."Actionisuniqueinthatitsets-inmotionprocesses

thatintheirautomatismlookverymuchlikenaturalprocesses,

andactionalsomarksthestart ofsomething,beginssomething

new,seizestheinitiative,or,inKantianterms,forgesitsown

chain.Themiracleoffreedomisinherentinthisabilitytomakea

beginning,whichitselfisinherentinthefactthateveryhuman

being,sim

plybybeingbornintoaworldthatwastherebefore

himandwillbethereafterhim, ishimselfanewbeginning.

Theideathatfreedomisidenticalwithbeginningor,againto

useaKantianterm,withspontaneity,seemsstrangetousbecause,

accordingtoourtraditionofconceptualthoughtanditscatego-

ries,freedom

isequatedwithfreedomofthewill,andweunder-

standfreedomofthewilltobeachoicebetweengivensor,toput

itcrudely,betweengoodandevil.Wedonotseefreedomassim-

plywantingthisorthattobechangedinsomewayorother.Our

traditionisbased,tobesure,onitsowngoodreasons,whichwe

neednotgointohere,excepttonotethatsincethewaningyears of

classicalantiquityithasbeenextraordinarilyreinforcedby

the

Widespreadconvictionthatfreedomnotonlydoesnotlieinaction

andinpolitics,but,on

thecontrary,ispossibleonlyifman

renouncesactionandwithdrawsfrom

theworldandintohimself,

avoidingpoliticsaltogether. Thisconceptualandcategoricaltra-

ditioniscontradictedbyeveryone'sexperience,beitpublicorpri-

lI.]

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

vate,anditiscontradictedaboveallbytheneverentirelyforgot-

tenevidencefoundintheclassicallanguages,wheretheGreek

verbarchein

meansbothtobeginandtolead,thatis,tobefree,

andtheLatin

verbageremeanstosetsomethinginmotion,to

unleashaprocess.

If,then,weexpectmiraclesasaconsequenceoftheimpassein

whichourworldfindsitself,suchanexpectationinnowayban-

ishesusfromthepoliticalrealminitsoriginalsense.Ifthemean-

ingofpoliticsisfreedom,thatmeansthatinthisrealm-and

innoother-wedoindeedhavetherighttoexpectmiracles.Not

becausewesuperstitiouslybelieveinmiracles,butbecausehuman

beings,whetherornottheyknow

it,aslongastheycanact,are

capableofachieving,andconstantlydoachieve,theimprobable

andunpredictable.Thequestionofwhetherpoliticsstillhasany

meaninginevitablysendsus,atthatverypointwhereitendsina

beliefinmiracles-andwhereelsecoulditpossiblyend?-right

backtothequestionofthemeaningofpolitics.

TheMeaningofPolitics

Boththemistrustofpoliticsandthequestionastothemeaningof

politicsareveryold,asoldasthetraditionofpoliticalphilosophy.

Theygoback

toPlatoandperhapseventoParmenides,andthey

aroseoutoftheveryrealexperiencesthatthesephilosophershad

inthepolis,whichistosay,inanorganizationalformofhuman

communallifethatdeterminedinsuchexemplaryanddefinitive

wayswhatwestillunderstand

bypoliticsthateventheword

"politics"inallEuropeanlanguagesisderivedfrom

theGreek

polis. Equallyasoldasthequestionaboutthemeaningofpoliticsare

theanswersthatofferjustificationforpolitics,andalmostallthe

definitionsinourtraditionareessentiallyjustifications.Toputit

1/4

IntroductionintoPolitics

inverygeneralterms,allthesejustificationsordefinitionsendup

characterizingpolitics asameanstosomehigherend,although,to

besure,definitions ofwhatthatendshouldbehavevariedwidely

downthroughthecenturies.Variedastheyare,however,theycan

betracedbacktoafewbasicanswers,andthisfactspeaksforthe

elementarysimplicityofwhatitiswearedealingwithhere.

Politics,sowearetold, isanabsolutenecessityforhumanlife,

notonIyforthelifeofsocietybutfortheindividualaswell.

Becausemanisnotself-sufficientbut isdependentinhisexistence

onothers,provisionsmust bemadethataffecttheexistenceofall,

sincewithoutsuchprovisions,communallifewouldbeimpossi-

ble.Thetask,theendpurpose,ofpoliticsistosafeguardlifeinthe

broadestsense.Politicsmakesitpossiblefortheindividualtopur-

suehisownends,tobe,thatis,unmolestedbypolitics-and

itmakesnodifferencewhatthosespheresoflifearethatpoliticsis

supposed

tosafeguard,whetherits

purposeis,astheGreeks

thought,tomakeitpossibleforafewtoconcernthemselveswith

philosophyor,inthemodernsense,tosecurelife,livelihood,and

aminimum

ofhappinessforthemany.Moreover,asMadison

onceremarked,sinceourconcernisthecommunallifeofmen

andnotangels,provisionsforhumanexistencecanbeachieved

onlybythestate,whichholdsamonopolyonbruteforceandpre-

ventsthewarofallagainstall.

Theseanswerstakeitasself-evidentthatpoliticshasexistedin

allrimesandeverywherethatmenlivecommunallyinanyhistori-

calandcivilizingsense.Thisassumptioncustomarilyappealsto

theAristoteliandefinitionofmanasapoliticalanimal,andthat

sameappealisofnosmallimportance,sincethepolishasdeci-

sivelyshaped,bothinlanguageandcontent,theEuropeancon-

ceptofwhatpoliticsactuallyisandwhatmeartingithas.Itis

likewiseofnosmallimportancethatthisappealtoAristotle

is

1/5

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

basedon

averyold,although

postclassical,misunderstanding.

ForAristotlethewordpolitilcoTlwasanadjectivethatappliedto

theorganizationofthepolisandnotadesignationforjustany

formofhumancommunallife,andhecertainlydidnotthinkthat

allmenarepolitical orthatthereispolitics,thatis,apolis,nomat-

terwherepeoplelive.Hisdefinitionexcludednotjustslaves,but

alsobarbarians,whowereruledbydespotsinAsianempiresbut

whosehumanityheneverdoubted.Whathemeantwasmerely

thatitisuniquetomanthathe

canliveinapolisandthatthe

organizedpolisisthehighestformofhumancommunallifeand

thussomething

specifically

human,atequalremovefrom

the

gods,whocanexist inandofthemselvesinfullfreedomandinde-

pendence,andanimals,whosecommunallife,iftheyhavesucha

thing,isamatterofnecessity.Aswithmanyotherissuesinhis

politicalwritings,Aristotlewasprovidingnot somuchhisper-

sonalopinionashewasreflectingaview

sharedwith

allother

Greeksoftheperiod,evenifthatview

usuallywentunarticu-

lated.ThuspoliticsintheAristoteliansenseisnotself-evidentand

mostcertainlyisnotfoundeverywheremenliveincommunity.It

existed,astheGreekssawit,onlyinGreece--andeventherefor

onlyarelativelyshortperiodoftime.

Whatdistinguishesthecommunallifeofpeopleinthepolis

from

allotherformsofhumancommunallife-withwhichthe

Greeksweremostcertainlyfamiliar-isfreedom.Thisdoesnot

mean,however,thatthepoliticalrealmwasunderstood

asa

meanstomakehumanfreedom-afreelife-possible.Beingfree

andlivinginthepoliswere,inacertainsense,oneandthesame.

Butonlyinacertainsense,fortobeabletoliveinapolisatall,

manalreadyhadtobefreeinanotherregard-hecouldnotbe

subjectasaslavetosomeoneelse'sdomination,orasaworkerto

thenecessityofearninghisdailybread.Manmustfirstbeliber-

IntroductionintoPolitics

atedorliberatehimselfinordertoenjoyfreedom,andbeinglib-

eratedfrom

dominationbylife'snecessitieswasthetruemeaning

oftheGreekwordschollortheLatin

otium-whatwetodaycall

leisure.Thisliberation,incontrasttofreedom,wasanendthat

could,andhadto,beachievedby

certainmeans.Thiscrucial

meanswasslavery,thebruteforcebywhichonemancompelled

otherstorelievehimofthecaresofdailylife.Unlikeallformsof

capitalistexploitation,which

pursue

primarily

economicends

aimedatincreasingwealth,thepoint oftheexploitationofslaves

inclassicalGreecewastoliberatetheirmastersentirelyfrom

laborsothattheythenmightenjoythefreedomofthepolitical

arena.Thisliberationwasaccomplishedbyforceandcompulsion,

andwasbasedontheabsoluterulethateveryheadofhousehold

exercisedoverhishouse.Butthisrulewasnotitselfpolitical,

althoughitwasanindispensableprerequisiteofallthingspoliti-

cal.Ifonewishestounderstandpoliticswithinthecontextofthe

categories ofmeansandends,politicsintheGreeksensewas,asit

wasforAristotle,prim

arilyanendandnotameans.Andthatend

wasnotfreedom

assuch,asitwasrealizedinthepolis,butrather

theprepoliticalliberationfortheexerciseoffreedominthepolis.

Herethemeaningofpolitics,indistinctiontoitsend,isthatmen

intheirfreedom

caninteractwithoneanotherwithoutcompul-

sion,force,andruleoverone

asequalsamongequals,

commandingandobeyingoneanotheronlyinemergencies-that

is,intimesofwar-butotherwisemanagingalltheiraffairsby

speakingwithandpersuadingoneanother.

intheGreeksenseoftheword,isthereforecentered

around

freedom,wherebyfreedomisunderstoodnegativelyas

notbeingruledorruling,andpositivelyasaspacewhichcanbe

createdonlybymenandinwhicheachmanmovesamonghis

peers.Withoutthosewho

aremyequals,thereisno

freedom,

THEPROMISEOFPOL1T1CS

whichiswhythemanwhorulesoverothers-and

forthatvery

reasonisdifferentfromthem

onprinciple---isindeedahappier

andmoreenviablemanthanthoseoverwhomherules,but heis

notonewhitfreer.Hetoomovesinasphereinwhichthereisno

freedom

whatever.Wefindthisdifficulttounderstandbecause

welinkequalitywiththeconcept ofjustice,notwiththatoffree-

dom,whichiswhywemisunderstandtheGreekterm

forafree

constitution,

isonom

ia,tomeanwhatequalitybeforethelaw

meansforus.But

isonom

iadoesnotmeanthatallmenareequal

beforethelaw, orthatthelawisthesameforall,butmerelythat

allhavethesameclaimtopoliticalactivity,andinthepolisthis

activityprimarily

took

theformofspeakingwithoneanother.

lsonom

iaisthereforeessentiallytheequalrighttospeak,andas

suchthesamethingas

isegoria;later,inPolybius,bothsimply

meanisologia.*To

speakintheformofcommandingandtohear

intheformofobeyingwerenotconsideredactualspeechand

hearing;theywerenotfreebecausetheywereboundupwith

aprocessdefined

notby

speaking

butby

doingandlaboring.

Words,inthiscase,wereonlyasubstitutefordoingsomething,

and,infact,somethingthatpresumedtheuseofforceandbeing

forced.WhentheGreekssaidthatslavesandbarbarianswere

aneu

logou(withoutwords),whattheymeantwasthatthesitua-

tionofslavesandbarbariansmadethem

incapableoffreespeech.

The

despot,who

knowsonlycommands,findshimselfinthe

samesituation;inordertospeak,hewould'needotherswhoare

hisequals,Freedomdoesnotrequireanegalitariandemocracyin

themodernsense,butratheraquitenarrowlylimitedoligarchyor

aristocracy,anarenainwhichatleastafeworthebestcaninteract

withoneanotherasequalsamongequals.Thisequalityhas,of

course,nothingtodowithjustice.

*/slgoriaandirologiaexplicidyrefertoequalfreedomofspeecll.-Ed.

u8

1 IIntroductionintoPolitics

Thecrucialpointaboutthiskindofpoliticalfreedomisthatit

isaspatialconstruct.W

hoeverleaveshispolisorisbanishedfrom

itlosesnotjusthishometownorhisfatherland;healsolosesthe

onlyspaceinwhichhecanbefree-andhelosesthesocietyofhis

equals.Butintermsoflifeandhisbeingprovidedwithitsneces-

sities,thisspaceoffreedomwasscarcelynecessaryorindispens-

able;indeeditwasmoreofahindrance.TheGreeksknew

from

personalexperiencethatareasonabletyrant(whatwewouldcall

anenlighteneddespot)workedtogreatadvantagewhenitcame

toacity'swelfareandtowhetherthearts,bothmaterialandintel-

lectual,flourishedwithinit.Butwith

thetyrantcameanendto

freedom.Citizenswerebanishedtotheirhomes,andtheagora,

thespacewheretheinteractionofequalswasplayed

out,was

deserted.Therewasno

longeraspaceforfreedom,andthat

meantthatpoliticalfreedom

nolongerexisted.

Thisisnottheplacetodiscusswhatelsewaslostwiththisloss

ofpoliticalspace,whichinclassicalGreececoincideswiththeloss

offreedom.Ouronlyconcernherewastoprovideabriefretro-

spectiveglanceatwhat wasoriginallyincludedintheconceptof

politics,sothatwemightbecuredofourm

odernprejudicethat

politicsisanineluctablenecessity,andthatithasexistedalways

andeverywhere.Anecessity-whetherinthesenseofanundeni-

ableneedofhumannarure,likehungerorlove,orwhetherin

thesenseofanindispensableinstitutionofhuman

communal

life-ispreciselywhatpoliticsisnot.Infact,itbeginswherethe

realmofmaterialnecessitiesandphysicalbruteforceend.Poli-

ticsassuchhasexistedsorarelyandinsofewplacesthat,histori-

callyspeaking,onlyafewgreatepochshaveknownitandturned

itintoareality.Thesefewgrandstrokesofhistoricalgoodfor-

tune,however,havebeencrucial;onlyinthem

hasthem

eaningof

politics-inboththebenefitsandthemischiefthatcomewith

it-beenfully

manifested.And

suchepochshavethensetthe

U!J

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

standard,butnotinsuchawaythattheorganizationalforms

inherentinthem

couldthenbeimitated,butrather sothatcertain

ideasandconcepts,whichforabrieftimewerefullyrealizedin

them,alsodeterminethoseepochsdeniedafullexperienceof

politicalreality.

Themostimportantoftheseideas,theonethatremainsacom-

pellinglyvalid

partofourconceptofpoliticsandhasthussur-

vivedallhistoricalreversalsandtheoreticaltransformations,is

withoutdoubttheideaoffreedom.Theideathatpoliticsand

freedomareboundtogether,makingtyrannytheworstofpoliti-

calgovernmentsandindeedantipolitical,threadsitswaythrough

thethinkingandactionofEuropeanculturedowntorecenttimes.

Notuntiltotalitarianregimesandtheideologiescongruentwith

them

didanyonedaretocutthisthread-noteven

Marxism,

which,uptothatpoint,hadannouncedtherealmoffreedom

and

adictatorshipoftheproletariat(conceivedintheRomansense)as

atemporaryinstrumentofrevolution.Whatmakestotalitarian-

ismtrulynewandterrifyingisnotitsdenialoffreedomorthe

claimthatfreedom

isneithergoodnornecessaryforhumankind,

butratherthenotionthathumanfreedommustbesacrificedto

historicaldevelopment,aprocessthatcanbeimpededonlywhen

humanbeingsactandinteractinfreedom.Thisviewissharedby

allspecificallyideologicalpoliticalmovements,inwhichthecru-

cialtheoreticalissue

isthatfreedom

isnotlocalized

ineither

humanbeingsintheiractionandinteractionorinthespacethat

formsbetweenmen,butratherisassignedtoaprocessthat

unfoldsbehindthebacksofthosewhoactanddoesitsworkin

secret,beyondthevisiblearenaofpublicaffairs.Themodelfor

thisconcept offreedom

isariverflowingfreely,inwhichevery

attempttoblockitsflowisanarbitraryimpediment.Thoseinthe

modernworldwhoreplacetheancientdichotomyoffreedomand

/20

1IntroductionintoPolitics

necessitybyequatingitwiththedichotomyoffreedomandarbi-

tratyactionfindtheirunspoken

justificationinthismodel.In

everysuchcase,theconceptofpolitics,howevervariouslycon-

stituted,isreplacedbythemodernconceptofhistory.Political

eventsandpoliticalactionareabsorbedintothehistoricalprocess,

andhistorycomestomean,inaveryliteralsense,theflowofhis-

tory. Thedistinctionbetweensuchpervasiveideologicalthinking

andtotalitarianregimesliesinthefactthatthelatterhavediscov-

eredthepoliticalmeanstointegratehumanbeingsintothe/lowof

historyinsuchawaythattheyaresototallycaughtupinits"free-

dom,"inits

flow,"'thattheycannolongerobstructitbut

insteadbecomeimpulsesforitsacceleration.Thisisaccomplished

bymeansofcoerciveterrorappliedfrom

outsideandcoercive

ideologicalthinkingunleashedfromwithin-aformofthinking

thatjoinsthecurrentofhistoryandbecomes,asitwere,anintrin-

sicpartofitsflow.Withoutadoubt,thistotalitariandevelopment

isthedecisivesteponthepathtowardabolishingfreedominthe

realworld.Butthisdoesnotmeanthattheconcept offreedom

has

notalreadydisappearedintheorywherevermodernthoughthas

replacedtheconcept ofpoliticswiththeconceptofhistory.

OnceitwasbornwithintheGreekpolis,theideathatpoliticsis

inevitablyboundtofreedomwasabletoholdonthroughthemil-

lennia,whichisallthemoreremarkableandcomfortinginasmuch

asthereisscarcelyanyotherconceptofWesternthinkingand

experiencethathasundergonesuchchangeandenrichmentover

time.Freedomoriginallymeantnothingmorethanbeingableto

gowhereonepleased,butthisincludedmorethanwhatweunder-

standtodayasfreedom

ofmovement.Itdidnotmeanmerelythat

onewasuotsubjecttocoercionbyanotherperson,butalso

that

onecouldremoveoneselffrom

theentirerealmofcoercion-

ofthehousehold,alongwith

its"family"(itselfaRomancou-

/21

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

cept,thatMommsenoncebrusquelytranslatedas"servitude"

[TheodorMommsen,Romische

Geschichte,vol.I,p.62D.Only

themasterofthehouseholdhadthisfreedom,andwhatconsti-

tuteditwasnothisdominionoverothermembersofhishouse-

hold,butthat,on

thebasisofthatsamedominion,hecould

abandonhishousehold,hisfamilyintheclassicalsense.Itisobvi-

ousthatfromthestarttherewasanelementofrisk,ofdaring,

inherentinthisfreedom. Thehousehold,whichafreemancould

leaveatwill,wasnotjusttheplacewheremanwasruledbyneces-

sityandcoercion,butalsotheplacewherethelifeofevery

individual-thoughboundupinthatnecessity

andcoercion-

wassecured,whereeverythingwasorganizedtoprovideenough

oflife'snecessities.Thusonlythatmanwasfreewho

waspre-

paredtoriskhisownlife,anditwasthemanwiththeunfreeand

servilesoulwhoclungtoodear!ytolife-aviceforwhichthe

Greeklanguagehasaspecialword:philopsychia.*

Thenotionthatonlyheisfreewhoispreparedtoriskhislife

hasnevervanishedentirelyfrom

ourconsciousness;andthatalso

holdstrueingeneralfortheconnectionofpoliticswith

danger

andrisk.Courageistheearliestofallpoliticalvirtues,andeven

todayitisstilloneofthefewcardinalvirtuesofpolitics,because

onlybysteppingoutofourprivateexistenceandthefamilialrela-

tionshipstowhichourlivesaretiedcanwemakeourwayintothe

commonpublicworldthatisourtrulypoliticalspace.Veryearly

on,thespaceenteredbythosewhodaredtocrossthethresholdof

theirhousesceasedtobearealmofgreatenterpriseandadven-

turesthatamanmightembarkonandhopetosurviveonlyifhe

werejoinedbyhisequals.Thoughtheworldthatlayopentosuch

stoutheartedandenterprisingadventurerswas,tobesure,public,

·Literally,loveoflife,withtheconnotationoffaimheartedness.-Ed.

122

IntroductionintoPolitics

itwasnotyetapoliticalspaceinthetruesense.Therealminto

whichsuchmenofdaringventuredbecamepublicbecausethey

wereamongtheirequals,whowerecapableofseeingandhearing

andadmiringoneanother'sdeeds,ofwhichthesagasoflater

poetsandstorytellersassuredthem

lastingfame.InCOntrastto

whatoccursinprivacyandinthefamily,inthesecurityofone's

ownfourwalls,everythinghereappearsinthelightthatcanbe

generatedonlyinapublicspace,thatis,inthepresenceofothers.

Butthislight,whichistheprerequisiteofallrealappearancesin

theworld, isdeceptiveaslongasitismerelypublicbutnotpoliti-

cal.Thepublicspaceofadventureandenterprisevanishesthe

momenteverythinghascometoanend,oncethearmyhasbroken

campandthe"heroes"-which

forHomermeanssimplyfree

men-havereturnedhome.Thispublicspacedoesnotbecome

politicaluntilitissecuredwithinacity,isbound,thatis,toacon-

creteplacethatitselfsurvivesboththosememorabledeedsand

thenamesofthememorablemenwhoperformedthem

andthus

canpassthem

ontoposterityovergenerations. Thiscity,which

offersapermanentabodeformortalmenandtheirtransientdeeds

andwords, isthepolis;itispoliticalandthereforedifferentfrom

othersettlements(forwhichtheGreekshadadifferentword:

""tit),becauseitispurposefullybuiltarounditspublicspace,the

agora,wherefreemencouldmeetaspeersonanyoccasion.

ThiscloselinkbetweenpoliticsandtheHomericaccountsisof

greatimportanceforourunderstandingofourownpoliticalcon-

ceptoffreedomandhowitaroseintheGreekpolis.Andthisis

truenotonlybecauseHomerultimatelybecametheeducatorof

thepolis,butalsobecausetotheGreekwayof

thinking

the

foundingofthepolisasaninstitutioniscloselylinkedtoexperi-

encescontainedwithintheHomericaccounts.ThustheGreeks

hadnodifficultytransferringthecentralconceptofafreepolis,

12,J

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

freeofanytyrant'srule-thatis,theconceptofisonomiaand

isegon'a-backtoHomerictimes,becausetheexampleofthe

magnificentexperienceoflife'spossibilitiesamongone'sequals

wasalreadypresent intheHomericepics;andonecouldalso,and

thiswasperhapsevenmoreimportant,seetheriseofthepolisas

aresponsetotheseexperiences.Thiscouldoccurnegatively,so

tospeak-inthesamewaythatPericlesreferstoHomerinhis

funeraloration.Thepolishadtobefoundedtosecureforthe

grandeurofhumandeedsandspeechanabodemoresecurethan

thecommemorationthatthepoethadrecordedandperpetuated

inhispoem

(Thucydides,ii,4')'Butitcouldalsoberegarded

positively-inthesamewaythatPlatooncesuggested(in

his

EleventhLetter,359b)thatthepolisarosefrom

theconjunctionof

greateventsinwarorotherdeeds---thatis,from

politicalactivity

anditsinherentgreatness.InbothcasesitisasiftheHomeric

armyneverdisbandedbutupon

itsreturn

tothehomeland

reassembled,establishedthepolis,andthusfoundaspacewhereit

couldstaypermanently

intact.Whateverchangesthisperma-

nencemightundergointhefuture,thesubstanceofthespaceof

thepolisremainedtiedtoitsoriginsintheHomericworld.

Tobesure,itisonlynaturalwithinapoliticalspaceinthetrue

sensethatwhatisunderstood

byfreedomwillshiftinmean-

ing.Thepointofenterpriseandofadventurefadesmoreand

more,andwhereaswhatbeforewas,sotospeak,onlyanecessary

adjunct tosuchadventures,theconstantpresenceofothers,deal-

ingwith

othersinthepublicspaceoftheagora,theisegoria

asHerodotusputsit,nowbecomestherealsubstanceofafreelife.

Atthesametime,themostimportantactivityofafreelifemoves

from

actiontospeech,fromfreedeeds tofreewords.

Thisshiftisofgreatimportanceandpossessesgreatervalidity

withinthetraditionofourconceptoffreedom-inwhichthe

1

IntroduetionintoPolitics

notionsofactionandspeecharekeptseparateonprinciple,corre-

sponding,asitwere,totwoentirelydifferentfacultiesofman-

thanwaseverthecaseinthehistoryofGreece.Foritisoneofthe

mostremarkableandfascinatingfactsofGreekthoughtthatfrom

theverybeginning,whichmeansasearlyasHomer,suchasepa-

rationonprinciplebetweenspeechandactiondoesnotoccur,

sinceadoerofgreatdeedsmustatthesametimealwaysbea

speakerofgreatwords---andnotonlybecausegreatwordswere

needed

toaccompanyandexplaingreatdeedsthatwouldother-

wise

fallintomuteoblivion,butalso

becausespeechitselfwas

from

thestartconsideredaform

ofaction.Mancannotdefend

himselfagainsttheblowsoffate,againstthechicaneryofthe

gods,buthecanresistthem

inspeechandrespondtothem,and

though

theresponsechangesnothing,neitherturningillfor-

tuneasidenorpromptinggood

fortune,suchwordsbelongto

theevent assuch.Ifwordsareofequalrankwith

theevent,if,

asissaidattheendofAntigone,"greatwords"answerandrequite

"greatblowsstruckfrom

onltigh,"thenwhathappensisitself

somethinggreatandworthyofremembranceandfame.Speech

inthissenseisaformofaction,andourdownfallcanbecome

adeedifwehurlwordsagainstitevenasweperish.Greek

tragedy-itsdrama,itsenactedevents-isbasedonthisfunda-

mentalconviction.

Tltisunderstandingofspeech,whichalsounderliesthediscov-

erybyGreekphilosophyoftheautonomouspowerofthelogos,

alreadybeginstofadeintheexperienceofthepolis,onlytovan-

ishentirelyfromthetraditionofpoliticalthought.Ratherearly

on,freedom

ofopirtion-therighttoheartheopinionsofothers

andtohaveone'sownopinionheard,whichforusstillconstitutes

aninalienablecomponentofpoliticalfreedom-displaced

this

otherversionoffreedom,which,thoughitdoesnotcontradict

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

freedom

ofopinion,ispeculiarly

associated

with

actionand

speechinsofar asspeechisanact.Thisfreedom

consistsofwhat

wecallspontaneity,which,accordingtoKant,isbasedonthe

abilityofeveryhumanbeingtoinitiateaseqnence,toforgeanew

chain.PerhapsthebestillustrationwithinthearenaofGreekpoli-

ticsthatfreedom

ofactionisthesamethingasstartinganew

andbeginningsomething

isthatthewordarcheinmeanshath

tobeginandtolead.Thistwofoldmeaningmanifestlyindicates

thatoriginallytheterm

"leader"wasusedforthepersonwho

initiatedsomethingandsoughtoutcompanionstohelphimcarry

itout;andthiscarrying

out,thisbringingsomething

thathas

beenbeguntoitsend,wastheoriginalmeaningoftheword

foraction,prattein.Thesamelinkagebetweenbeingfreeand

beginningsomethingisfoundintheRomanideathatthegreat-

nessoftheforebearswascontainedinthefoundingofRome,and

thatthefreedom

oftheRomansalwayshadtobetracedtothis

founding-aburbecondita-whereabeginninghadbeenmade.

Augustinethenaddedtheontologicalbasisforthisfreedomas

experiencedbytheRomansbysayingthatmanhimselfisabegin-

ning,an

inicium,insofarashehasnotalwaysexistedbutfirst

comesintotheworldbybirth.DespiteKant'spoliticalphiloso-

phy,which,viahisexperienceoftheFrenchRevolution,becamea

philosophyoffreedom,withitscorecenteredaroundtheconcept

ofspontaneity,itisonlyinourowntimethatwehavecometo

realizetheextraordinarypoliticalsignificanceofafreedomthat

liesinourbeingabletobeginanew-probablypreciselybecause

totalitarianregimeshavenotheencontentsimplytosquelchfree-

domofopinion,buthavealsosetaboutonprincipletodestroy

humanspontaneityinallspheres.Thisinturnisinevitablewher-

everthehistorical-politicalprocessisdefinedindeterministic

termsassomethingthatispreordainedfrom

theoutsettofollow

126

IntroductionintoPolitics

itsownlawsandisthereforefullyknowable.Butwhatstandsin

oppositiontoallpossiblepredeterminationandknowledgeofthe

futureisthefactthattheworldisdailyrenewedthroughbirthand

isconstantlydraggedintowhatisunpredictablynewbythespon-

taneityofeachnewarrival.Onlyifwerobthenewhornoftheir

spontaneity,theirrighttobeginsomethingnew,canthecourseof

theworldhedefineddeterministicallyandpredicted.

Freedomofopinionanditsexpression,whichhecamedetermi-

nativeforthepolis,differsfromthefreedominherentinaction's

abilitytomakeanewbeginninginthatitisdependenttoafar

greaterextentonthepresenceofothersandofourbeingcon-

frontedwith

theiropinions.Granted,actionlikewise

cannever

occurinisolation,insofarasthepersonwhobeginssomethingcan

embarkuponitonlyafterhehaswonoverotherstohelphim.In

thissenseallactionisaction"inconcert,"asBurkelikedtosay;nit

isimpossibletoactwithoutfriendsandreliablecomrades"(Plato,

SeventhLetter,32)d);impossible,thatis,inthesenseoftheGreek

verbprattein,tocarryoutandcomplete.Butthisisinfactonly

onestageofaction,although

astheonethatultimatelydeter-

mineshowhumanaffairs

turnoutandhowtheyappear,itis

themostpoliticallyimportantstage.Itisprecededhythebegin-

ning,the

archein;butsuchinitiative,whichdetermineswhowill

betheleaderor

archon,theprimus

interpares,reallydependson

anindividualandhiscouragetoembarkonanenterprise.Asin-

gleindividual,Herculesforinstance,canofcourseultimately

actalone,ifthegodshelphimtoaccomplish

greatdeeds,and

heneedsotherpeopleonlytoensurethatnewsofhisdeedswill

bespread.Although

allpoliticalfreedomwouldforfeititshest

anddeepestmeaningwithoutthisfreedom

ofspontaneity,the

latterisitselfprepolitical,asitwere;spontaneity

dependson

organizationalformsofcommunallifeonlytotheextentthatitis

12J

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

ultimatelytheworldthatcanorganizeit.Butsince,inthefinal

sense,itarisesfrom

theindividual,itcan,evenunderveryunfa-

vorableconditions--anattack

byatyrant,forexample-still

preserveitself.Spontaneity

revealsitselfintheproductivityof

theartist,justasitdoeswith

everyonewhoproducesthingsof

theworldinisolationfrom

others,andonecansaythatnopro-

ductionispossiblewithoutfirsthavingbeencalledintolifebythis

capacitytoact.Agreatmanyhumanactivities,however,canpro-

ceedonlyatsomeremovefrom

thepoliticalsphere,andthis

removeisindeedanessentialconditionforcertainkindsofhuman

productivity.

Thisisnotatallthecasewiththefreedom10speakwith

one

another,whichispossibleonlyininteractionwith

others.Free

speechhasalwayscomeinmanydifferentformsandwithmany

meanings,andeveninantiquityithadaboutitthatoddambiguity

thatstillclingstoittoday.Thekeything,however,boththenand

now,isnotthatapersoncansaywhateverhepleases,orthateach

ofushasaninherentrighttoexpresshimselfjustasheis.The

pointis,rather,thatweknow

from

experiencethatnoonecan

adequatelygrasptheobjectiveworldinitsfullrealityallanhis

own,becausetheworldalwaysshowsandrevealsitselftohim

from

onlyoneperspective,whichcorresponds 10hisstandpointin

theworldandisdetermined

byit.Ifsomeonewants10seeand

experiencetheworldasit"really"is,hecandosoonlybyunder-

standing

itassomething

thatisshared

bymanypeople,lies

betweenthem,separatesandlinksthem,showingitselfdiffer-

ently

toeachandcomprehensibleonlytotheextentthatmany

peoplecantalkaboutitandexchangetheiropinionsandperspec-

tiveswithoneanother,overagainstoneanother.Onlyinthefree-

domofourspeakingwith

oneanotherdoestheworld,asthat

aboutwhichwespeak,emerge

initsobjectivity

andvisibility

128

Introduction.intoPolitics

from

allsides.Living

inarealworldandspeaking

with

one

anotheraboutitarebasicallyoneandthesame,andtotheGreeks,

privatelifeseemed"idiotic"becauseitlackedthediversity

that

comeswithspeakingaboutsomethingandthustheexperienceof

howthingsreallyfunctionintheworld.*

Thisfreedomofmovement,then-whetherasthefreedomto

departandbeginsomethingnewandunheard-oforasthefree-

domtointeractinspeechwith

manyothersandexperiencethe

diversity

thattheworldalwaysisinitstotality-mostcertainly

wasandisnottheendpurposeofpolitics,thatis,somethingthat

canbeachievedbypoliticalmeans.Itisratherthesubstanceand

meaningofallthingspoliticaLInthissense,politicsandfreedom

areidentical,andwhereverthiskindoffreedomdoesnotexist,

thereisnopoliticalspaceinthetruesense.Ontheotherhand,

themeansbywhichonecanestablishapoliticalspaceanddefend

itsexistenceareneitheralwaysnornecessarily

politicalmeans.

Themeansused10form

andmaintainapoliticalspaceweredefi-

nitelynotregardedby

theGreeks,forexample,aslegitimately

political-thatis,asconstitutingakindofactioncontainedinthe

essenceofthepolis.Theybelievedthattheestablishmentofthe

polisrequiresalawgivingact,butthislawgiverwasnotacitizen

ofthepolis,andwhathedidwasdefinitelynot"politicaL"They

likewisebelievedthatwheneverthepolisdealtwithotherstates,it

nolongeractuallyneededtoproceedpolitically, butcouldinstead

useforce-whetherthatwasbecauseitscontinuationwasthreat-

enedbythepowerofanothercommunityorbecauseitwishedto

makeotherssubservienttoit.Inotherwords,whatwetodaycall

"foreignpolicy"wasnotreallypoliticsfortheGreeksinanyreal

sense.Weshallreturntothisissuelater.Whatiscrucialforus

*InGreek,iJionmeansprivate,one'sown,peculiar.-Ed.

/29

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

hereistounderstandfreedomitselfaspoliticalandnotasapur-

pose,possiblythehighest,tobeobtainedbypoliticalmeans,and

torealizethatcoercionandbruteforcearealwaysmeansforpro-

tectingorestablishingorexpandingpoliticalspace,butinand

ofthemselvesaredefinitelynotpolitical.Theyarephenomena

peripheraltopoliticsandthereforenotpoliticsitself.

Politicalspaceassuchrealizesandguaranteesboththefreedom

ofallcitizensandthereality

discussedandattestedtoby

the

many.Butifweseekameaningbeyondthepoliticalrealm,wecan

dosoonlyif,likethephilosophersofthepolis,wechooseto

interactwiththefewratherthanwiththemanyandbecomecon-

vincedthatspeakingfreelywithothersaboutsomethingproduces

notrealitybutdeception,nottruthbutlies.

Parmenidesappearstohavebeenthefirsttotakethisview,and

thecrucialfactorforhimwasnot,forinstance,thatheseparated

themanybadpeoplefrom

thefewandbest,asHeraclitusdidand

aswastypifiedinthespiritoftheagon,whichmarkedallof

Greekpoliticallife,demandingthateachmanconstantlystriveto

bethebest.ButParmenidesdifferentiatedbetweenapathof

truth,whichstandsopenonlytotheindividualasanindividual,

andpathsofdeceptiontraveledby

everyonewhoisunderway

withhisfellowsforwhateverpurpose.Platofollowedhiminthis

toacertainextent.ButPlato'sadoptionof

Parmenideshere

becamepoliticallysignificantpreciselybecause,infoundingthe

Academy,Platodidnotinsistontheindividual,butrathertook

thefundamentalideaofafew,whointurncouldphilosophizein

freespeechwithoneanother,andmadeitareality.

Plato,thefatherofpoliticalphilosophyintheW

est,attempted

invariouswaystoopposethepolisandwhatitunderstoodby

freedombypositingapoliticaltheoryinwhichpoliticalstandards

werederivednotfrompoliticsbutfrom

philosophy,bydevelop-

130

IntroductionintoPolitics

ingadetailedconstitutionwhoselawscorrespondtoideasaccessi-

bleonlytothephilosopher,andultimatelybyinfluencingaruler

whomhehopedwouldrealizesuchlegislation-an

attemptthat

nearlycosthimhisfreedom

andhislife.FoundingtheAcademy

wasanothersuchattempt.Thisactstoodinoppositiontothepolis

becauseitsettheAcademyapartfromthepoliticalarena,butat

thesameitwasalsodoneinthespiritofthisspecificallyGreco-

Athenianpoliticalspace-thatis,insofarasitssubstancelayin

menspeakingwithoneanother.Andwiththattherearosealong-

sidetherealmofpoliticalfreedomanewspaceoffreedomthat

hassurviveddowntoourowntimeasthefreedomoftheuniver-

sityandacademicfreedom.Although

thisfreedomwascreated

afterthelikenessofafreedomoriginallyexperiencedpolitically,

andwaspresumablyunderstood

byPlatoasapossiblecoreor

startingpointfromwhichthecommunallifeofthemanywasto

bedefinedinthefuture,thedefactoeffectwastheintroductionof

anewconceptoffreedom

intotheworld.Incontradistinctiontoa

purelyphilosophicalfreedomvalid

onlyfortheindividual,for

whomallthingspoliticalaresoremotethatonlythephilosopher's

bodystillresidesinthepolis,thisfreedomofthefewispolitical

bynature.ThefreespaceoftheAcademywasintendedasafully

valid

substituteforthemarketplace,theagora,thecentralspace

forfreedominthepolis.Inorderfortheirinstitutiontosucceed,

thefewhadtodemandthattheiractivity,theirspeechwith

one

another,berelievedoftheactivitiesofthepolisinthesameway

thecitizens ofAthenswererelievedofallactivitiesthatdealtwith

earningtheirdailybread.Theyhadtobefreedfrom

politicsinthe

Greeksenseinordertobefreeforthespaceofacademicfreedom,

justasthecitizenhadtobefreedfrom

earningthenecessitiesof

lifeinordertobefreeforpolitics.Inordertoenterthe"aca-

demic"space,theyhadtoleavethespaceofrealpolitics,justas

1.31

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

citizenshadtoleavetheprivacyoftheirhouseholdstogotothe

marketplace.Just asliberationfrom

workandthecaresoflifewas

aprerequisiteforthefreedomofthepoliticalman,liberation

frompoliticswasaprerequisiteforthefreedomoftheacademic.

Itisinthiscontextthatwehearforthefirsttimethatpoliticsis

anecessity,thatpoliticsasawholeismerelyameanstoahigher

endthatliesoutsideofit,thatitmustthereforebejustifiedin

terms ofsuchadefinedend.Whatisstrikinghereisthatthepar-

allelwehavejustdescribed-by

whichitappearsasifacademic

freedomsimplytakestheplaceofpoliticsandasifthepolisis

relatedtotheAcademyinthesamewaythehouseholdisrelated

tothepolis--doesnotholdtrue.Forthehousehold(andthetasks

performedinittosustainlife)wasneverjustifiedasam

eanstoan

end-asif,toputitinAristotelianterms,"life"perseisameans

tothe"goodlife"possibleonlyinthepolis.Thiswasneitherpos-

siblenornecessary,becausethemeans!endscategoryhasno

applicationwhateverwithintherealmoflifeperse.Thepurpose

oflife,andallactivitiesoflaborboundupwithit,isobviouslythe

sustainingoflifeitself,andtheimpulsebehindthelabortosustain

lifedoesnotlieoutsideoflife,butisincludedinthelifeprocess,

whichforcesustolaborjustasitforcesustoeat.Ifwewantto

understandtheconnectionbetweenhouseholdandpolisinterms

ofendsandmeans,thenlifesustainedwithinthehouseholdisnot

ameanstothehigherpurposeofpoliticalfreedom,butrather,

controloverthenecessitiesoflifeandoverslavelaborwithinthe

householdisthemeansbywhichamanisliberatedtoengagein

politics.

Andinfact,justsuchaliberationbydomination-thelibera-

tionofthefew,whoenjoythefreedomtophilosophizebyruling

overthemany-iswhatPlatoproposed

intheform

ofthe

philosopher-king,buthisproposalhasneverbeentakenupbyany

1J2

IntroductionintoPolitics

philosopherafterhimandhasneverhadanypoliticalimpact.The

foundingoftheAcademy,however-preciselybecauseitspri-

maryaimwasnottrainingforalife ofpolitics,aswasthecasein

theschoolsoftheSophistsandorators-hasprovedextraordi-

narilyimportantforwhat westillunderstandbyfreedomtoday.

PlatohimselfmayhavebelievedthattheAcademywouldoneday

beabletoconquerandrulethepolis. Theonlyissueofconse-

quencetohissuccessors,andtolaterphilosophers,however,was

thattheAcademyguaranteedtothefewaninstitutionalizedspace

forfreedom,andfrom

theoutsetthisfreedomwasindeedunder-

stoodoveragainstthefreedomofthemarketplace.Theworldof

mendaciousopinionsanddeceptivespeechwastobeopposedby

itscounterpart,aworldoftruthandofspeechcompatiblewith

truth,theartofrhetoricopposedby

thescienceofdialectics.

Whatprevailedandstilldefinesourideaofacademicfreedom

todayisnotPlato'shopeof

governingthepolis

from

the

Academy,ofphilosophymoldingpolitics,butrathertheturning

awayfromthepolis, ana-politia,sotospeak,orindifferenceto

politics.

Thecrucialpointinthiscontextisnotsomuchtheconflict

betweenthepolisandthephilosophers,butthesimplefactthat

thisindifferenceofonerealmtowardtheother,whichseemedto

offeratemporaryresolutiontotheconflict,couldnotendurepre-

ciselybecausethespaceofthefewandoftheirfreedom,though

likewiseapublic,nonprivatespace,couldnotpossiblyfulfillthe

functionsassignedtoapoliticalspace,whichincludedeveryone

whohadthecapacitytoenjoyfreedom.Thefew,whereverthey

haveisolatedthemselvesfrom

themany-beitintheformofaca-

demicindifferenceoroligarchicrule--havemanifestlyendedup

dependingupon

themany,particularly

inallthosemattersof

communalliferequiringconcreteaction.Withinthecontextofa

IJJ

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

Platonicoligarchy,suchadependencecanmeanthatthemanyare

theretocarryoutthecommandsofrhefew-thatis,totakeupon

themselvesallrealactions-inwhichcasethedependenceofthe

fewisovercomebytheirowndominationinthesamewaythat

ruleoverahouseholdofslavescouldallow,afreeman

toover-

comehisdependenceonrhenecessitiesoflifebybasinghisfree-

domon

bruteforce.Or,ifthefreedom

ofthefewispurely

academicinnature,thenitmanifestlydependsuponthegoodwill

ofthepoliticalbodytoguaranreethatfreedom.Butinbothcases

politicsnolongerhasanyrhingtodowith

freedom

andisrhere-

forenolongerpoliticalintheGreeksense.Instead,politicscon-

cernsitselfwith

everything

thatguaranteestheexistenceof

freedom-thatis,wirh

administrationandprovisionof

life's

necessitiesinpeacetimeandwirhdefenseintimesofwar.Inthat

case,thesphereoffreedom

forthefewnotonlyhastroublemain-

tainingitselfoveragainstrherealmofpolitics,whichisdeter-

minedbyrhemany,butalso

dependsforitsveryexistenceupon

themany.Thesimultaneousexistenceof

thepolis

isofvital

necessityfortheacademy,beitthePlatonicversionorrhelater

university.Theupshot,however,isthatpoliticsasawholeis

obviouslyreducedtothatlowerlevelwhosetaskwastosustain

lifewirhinthepublicspaceofthepolis.Politicsbecomesonthe

onehandanecessitythatstandsinoppositiontofreedom,andyet

onrheorherhandistheprerequisiteforfreedom.Atrhesametime

thoseaspectsofpoliticsthatwereoriginally-thatis,inrheself-

understandingof

thepolis-marginalphenomenanowmani-

festlybecomecentraltotheentirerealmofpolitics.Forrhepolis,

providingforlife'snecessitiesanddefendingitselfwerenotatrhe

centerofpoliticallifebutwerepoliticalonlyintherealsenseof

theword,thatis,totheextentthatdecisionsconcerningthem

werenotdecreedfrom

onhighbutdecidedbypeopletalkingwith

134

IntroductionintoPolitics

andpersuading

oneanother.Butthatwaspreciselywhatno

longermatteredoncethejustificationforpoliticswasseenas

guaranteeingfreedomforthefew.Whatmatteredwasthatthose

issues ofexistenceoverwhichthefewhadnocontrolwereallrhat

waslefttopolitics.Granted,someconnectionbetweenpolitics

andfreedomispreserved,butthetwoareonlyconnected)not

equated.Freedomastheendpurposeofpoliticsestablisheslimits

totherealmofpolitics;thecriterionforactionwirhinthatrealmis

nolongerfreedom

butcompetenceandefficiencyinsecuringlife's

necessities.

Thedegradationofpoliticsatthehandsofphilosophy,famil-

iarsincethedaysofPlatoandArisrotle,depeudsentirelyonthe

separationofthemanyfromthefew.Thishashadaquiteextraor-

dinaryeffect,demonstrabledowntoourowntime,onallrheo-

reticalanswerstothequestionaboutthemeaningofpolitics.

Politically,however,allithasachievedisthea-politiaofrhephilo-

sophicalschoolsinantiquityandtheacademicfreedom

ofour

universities.Inotherwords,itspoliticalimpacthasalwaysbeen

limitedtothosefewforwhomtheauthenticphilosophicalexperi-

ence,inallitsoverwhelmingurgency,hasbeentheoverriding

issue--anexperiencethatbyitsverynarureleadsusawayfrom

thepoliticalrealmoflivingandspeakingwithoneanother.

Butrhistheoreticaleffectdidnotmarktheendof

things;

indeed,also

downtoourowntimethenotionhasprevailedinthe

wayborhthepoliticalrealmandpoliticiansdefinerhemselves-

thatpoliticsisandmustbejustifiedbyendpurposesthatlieabove

andbeyond

politics,eventhough

theseendpurposeshave,of

course,becomeconsiderablymoreshabbyovertime.Behindrhis

notionliesChristianity'srejectionandredefinitionof

politics,

whichalthoughitsupenficiallyresemblesthePlatonicdegradation

ofpolitics,isinfactfarmoreradicalandhasassumedfardifferent

'35

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

forms.AtlirstglanceitmayappearasifearlyChristianirysimply

demandedrhatthissame,asitwere,academicfreedomfrom

poli-

ticsthattheclassicalschoolshadclaimedforthemselvesbeappli-

cabletoeveryone.And

thisimpression

isreinforcedwhenwe

considerthatitsrejectionofthepublic,politicalrealmwenthand

inhandwiththefoundingofanewspacesetapartfrom

theexis-

tentpoliticalspace,wherethefaithfulcametogetherlirstasacon-

gregationandthenasachurch.Thisparallelismbecamefully

realized,however,onlywith

theriseofthesecularizedstate,in

which,tobesure,academicandreligiousfreedomareclosely

linked,insofarasthepublicpoliticalbodylegallyguaranteesfree-

domfrom

politics tothem

both.Aslongasoneunderstandspoli-

ticstobesolelyconcernedwith

whatisabsolutelynecessaryfor

mentoliveinacommunirysothattheythencanbegranted,

eitherasindividualsorinsocialgroups,afreedomthatlies

beyondbothpoliticsandlife'snecessities,weareindeedjustified

inmeasuringthedegreeoffreedomwithinanypoliticalbodyby

thereligiousandacademicfreedomthatittolerates,whichisto

say,bythesizeofthenonpoliticalspaceforfreedomthatitcon-

tainsandmaintains.

The

directpoliticalconsequencesoffreedomfrom

politics,

from

whichacademicfreedomhasprolitedsogreatly,canbe

traced

toother-andintermsofpolitics,farmoreradical-

experiencesthanthoseofthephilosophers.ForChristians,the

pointwasnotthataspaceforthefewshouldbeestablishedover

againstaspaceforthemany,oraspaceforeveryonebefoundedin

oppositiontotheauthorizedspace,butratherthatapublicspace

perse,whetherforthefeworthemany,wasintolerablebecause

itwaspublic.WhenTertulliansaysthat«nothingismorealien

tousChristiansthanwhatmatterspublicly"(Apologericus,

38),

theemphasisisdefinitelyon

«public."Weareaccustomed,and

IJ6

IntroductionintoPolitics

rightlyso,tounderstandtheearlyChristianrefusaltoparticipate

inpublicaffairseitherfrom

theRomanperspectiveofadiviniry

whorivalsthegodsofRomeorfrom

theChristianviewpointof

aneschatologicalexpectationthatisrelievedofallconcernfor

thisworld.Butthatmeanswefailtoseetheactualantipolitical

thrustoftheChristianmessageanditsunderlyingexperienceof

whatisessentialforhumancommunallife.Thereisnoquestion

thatinthepreachingofJesustheidealofgoodnessplaysthesame

roleastheidealofwisdomintheteachingof

Socrates.Jesus

rejectsbeingcalled"good"byhisdisciples,inthesamewaythat

Socratesrefusestobecalled"wise"byhispupils.Itisthenature

ofgoodness,however,thatitmusthideitself,thatitmaynot

appearintheworldaswhatitis.Acommunityofpeoplethatseri-

ouslybelievesthatallhumanaffairsshouldbemanagedaccording

togoodness;thatisthereforenotafraidatleasttoattempttolove

itsenemiesandtepayevilwithgood;that,inotherwords,consid-

erstheideal ofholinesstobeitsstandardofbehavior,notonlyto

savetheirindividualsoulsbyturningawayfrom

mankind,but

alsotomanagehumanaffairs-suchacommunityhasnochoice

buttoretreatfromthepublicarenaandavoiditsspotlight.Ithas

todoitsworkinhiding,becausetobeseenandheardinevitably

talresontheglowofappearanceinwhichallholiness-no

matter

howhardittriesnotto--instantlybecomeshypocrisy.

Unliketheretreatofphilosophersfrom

politics,early

Chris-

tiansdidnotturnawayfrom

politicsinordertowithdrawentirely

from

therealmofhumanaffairs.Sucharetreat,whichinthefirst

centuriesafterChristfoundthemostextremeformsoftheher-

mit'slifeperfectlyacceptable,wouldhavebeenablatantcontra-

dictiontothepreachingofJesusandwasconsideredhereticalby

theearly

Church.WhathappenedinsteadwasthattheChristian

messageprescribedamanner oflifeinwhichhumanaffairswere

13J

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

withdrawnentirelyfrom

thepublicarenaandtransferred

toa

personalrealmbetweenoneman

andanother.The

historical

situationwassuchthat,sincethisinterpersonalrealmstoodin

apparentoppositiontothepublic-politicalarena,itwasequated

andperhapsconfused

with

privacy.Throughout

allGreco-

Romanantiquity,privacywasunderstoodasthesolealternative

tothepublicarena,wherebythedecidingfactorforbothspaces

wasthecontrastbetweenwhatonewantedtoshow

totheworld

byallowingittoappearinpublicandwhatcouldexistonlyin

seclusionandthereforehadtoremainhidden.Politically,thecru-

cialfactorwasthatChristianitysoughtoutsuchseclusionand

from

withinthatseclusionclaimedcontrol ofwhathadformerly

beenpublicmatters.ForChristiansdo

notcontentthemselves

with

performingcharitabledeedsthatgobeyond

politics;they

explicitlyassertthatthey"practicejustice,"andinboththeJewish

andtheearly

Christianviews,thegivingofalmsisamatterof

justiceratherthanof

charity---exceptthatsuch

actsmustnot

appearbeforetheeyesofmen,cannotbeseenby

them,indeed

theymustremainsohiddenthatthelefthanddoesnot knowwhat

therighthandisdoing-thatis,theactorisbarredfrom

behold-

inghisowndeed(Matthew

G:Iff).

Indiscussingtheseissues,weneednotexploreindetailhow

inthecourseofhistorytheconsciouslyandradicallyantipoliti-

calcharacterofChristianitycouldbesuccessfullytransformed

soastomakeakindofChristianpoliticspossible.Thiswas-

apartfromthehistoricalnecessitythataccompaniedthecollapse

oftheRomanEmpire-theworkofoneman,Augustine,pre-

ciselybecauseanextraordinarytraditionofRomanthoughtstill

livedoninhim. Thereinterpretationofpoliticsthattookplace

hereisofcrucialimportancefortheentiretraditionofWestern

civilization,andnotonlyforthetraditionoftheoryandthought,

138

IntroducuonintoPolitics

butalsofortheframeworkinwhichrealpoliticalhistorythen

tookplace.NotuntilAugustinedidthebodypoliticitselfaccept

theview

thatpoliticsisameanstosomehigherendandthatfree-

domisanissuewithinpoliticsonlytotheextentthattherearecer-

tainareasthatpoliticsshouldreleasefrom

itscontrol.Now,

however,freedom

from

politicsisnolongeramatterforthefew,

butinsteadamatterforthemany,whoneithershouldnorneed

concernthemselveswith

theaffairsofgovernment,whileatthe

sametimetheburdenisplaceduponthefewtoconcernthem-

selveswiththenecessarypoliticalorderingofhumanaffairs.But

thisburdenoronusdoesnot,aswithPlatoandthephilosophers,

springfrom

thefundamentalhumanconditionofplurality,which

bindsthefewtothemany,theindividualtoeveryoneelse.Onthe

contrary,thisplurality

isaffirmed,andthemotivethatcompels

thefewtotakeuptheburdenofgoverningisnotfearofbeing

dominatedbyothersworsethanthemselves.Augustineexplicitly

demandsthatthelifeofthesaintsunfoldwithina"society,"and

incoiningtheideaofaciyitas

astateofGod,heassumes

thathuman

lifeisalso

politicallydetermined

bynonearthly

conditions-althoughheleavesopen

thequestionof

whether

politicalmatterswillstillbeanonusintheworldbeyond. Inany

case,themotiveforassumingtheburdenofearthlypoliticsislove

ofone'sneighbor,notfearofhim.

Thistransformationof

Christianitybroughtaboutby

the

thinking

andactionsof

Augustineiswhatultimatelyputthe

ChurchinthepositiontosecularizetheChristianflightintoseclu-

sion,toapointwherethefaithfulconstitutedwithintheworld

atotally

new,religiouslydefinedpublicspace,which,although

public,wasnotpolitical.Thepublicnatureofthisspaceofthe

faithful-the

onlyoneinwhich,throughouttheMiddleAges,it

waspossibletoaccommodatespecificallypoliticalhumanneeds-

'3.9

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

wasalwaysambiguous.Itwasprimarilyaspaceforassembly,and

thatmeansnotsimplyabuildinginwhichmenassemble,butalso

aspacebuiltfortheexpresspurposeofgatheringpeopletogether.

Butassuch, ifthetruecontentoftheChristianmessagewastobe

preserved,itdarednotbeaspaceforappearance,fordisplay.It

provedalmostimpossibletopreventthis,sinceanypublicspace,

whichisconstitutedby

anassemblyofmanypeople,willbyits

verynatureestablishitselfasaspacefordisplay.Christianpolitics

hasalwaysfacedatwofoldtask:first,ofmakingcertainthateven

asitinfluencessecularpolitics,thenonpoliticalspacewherethe

faithfulgather isitselfsecurefrom

outsideinfluence;andsecond,

ofpreventingitsplaceofassemblyfrom

becomingaplaceofdis-

playandthusturningthechurchintoonemoresecular,worldly

poweramongothers. Intheprocess,itturnedoutthatthisstateof

beingboundtotheworld,whichispartandparcelofanyphysical

spaceandallowsforbothappearanceanddisplay,isfarmore

difficulttocombatthananysecularclaimtopowercomingfrom

outside.ForwhentheReformationfinallysucceededinremov-

ingeverythingconnectedwith

appearanceanddisplayfrom

itschurches,turningthem

intoplacesofassemblyforthosewho

livedinseclusionfrom

theworldinthespirit oftheGospel,the

publiccharacter oftheseecclesiasticalspacesdisappearedaswell.

Evenifthesecularizationofallpubliclifehadnotfollowedinthe

wakeoftheReformation,whichisoftenregardedashavingbeen

itspacemaker,andevenifasaresultofthissecularizationreligion

hadnotbecomeaprivatematter,theProtestantchurchwould

alwayshavebeenhard-pressedtotakeon

thetaskofsupplying

asubstituteforclassicalcitizenship-ataskthattheCatholic

Churchmostcertainlymanagedforseveralcenturiesafterthefall

oftheRomanEmpire.

Whateverwemaysayaboutsuchhypotheticalpossibilitiesand

14°

IntroductionintoPolitics

alternatives,thedecisivepointisthatwiththeendoftheclassical

period

andtheestablishmentofan

ecclesiasticalpublicspace,

secularpoliticsremainedtiedbothtothosenecessitiesoflifethat

comefrom

man's

incommunity

andtotheprotection

offeredbyahigherrealm,whichuntiltheendoftheMiddleAges

remainedtangibly,spatiallypresentintheexistenceofchurches.

TheChurchneededpolitics,boththeworldlypoliticsofsecular

powersandreligiouslyorientedpoliticswithinitsownecclesiasti-

calrealm,inordertobeabletomaintainitselfonearthandassert

itselfinthisworld-thatis,asthevisibleChurch,incontrastto

theinvisible,whoseexistence,beingsolelyamatteroffaith,was

entirelyuntouchedbypolitics.AndpoliticsneededtheChurch-

notjustreligion,butalsothetangible,spatialexistenceofreli-

giousinstitutions-inordertoproveitshigherjustificationand

legitimation.Whatchangedwith

theadventofthemodernera

wasnotachangeintheactualfunctionofpolitics;itwasnotthat

politicswassuddenlyassignedanewdignitypeculiartoit.What

changedwasthearenasforwhichpolitiesseemednecessary.The

religiousrealmsankbackintotheprivatesphere,whiletherealm

oflifeanditsnecessities,whichbothinantiquityandintheMid-

dleAgeswasconsideredtheprivatesphereparexcellence,now

attainedanewdignityandthrustitselfintothepuhlicarenainthe

formofsociety.

Herewemustmakeapoliticaldistinctionbetweentheegali-

tariandemocracyofthenineteenthcentury-forwhichthepar-

ticipationofallingovernment,whateveritsform

mightbe,isa

categoricalsignofapeople'sfreedom-and

theenlighteneddes-

potismfoundatthebeginningofthemodernera,whichbelieved

thatapeople's"libertyandfreedomconsistsinhavingthegov-

ernment ofthoselawsbywhichtheirlifeandtheirgoodsmaybe

mosttheirown:'tisnotforhavingshareinGovernment,thatis

141

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

nothingpertainingtothem.'"

Inbothcases,thepurposeofgov-

ernment,towhose

fieldof

activity

politicsisfromhereon

assigned,istoprotectthefreeproductivityofthesocietyandthe

secutityoftheindividualinhisprivatelife.Whatevertherela-

tionshipbetweencitizenandstate,freedomandpoliticsaredefi-

nitelykeptseparate,andbeingfreeinthesenseofapositive,

freelyunfoldingactivityisnowconfinedtoarealmthatdealswith

thingsthatbynaturecannotpossiblybeheldincommonbyall,

namely,with

lifeandproperty,with

thosethingsthataremost

specificallyourown.Thenewphenomenonofasocietalspace

andof

social,nonindividualproductiveenergiesenormously

enlargedthissphereofpersonalownership,thesphereofthe

dion-inwhichtheGreeksthoughtit"idiotically"stupidfor

anyonetospendhistime.This,however,innowaychangesthe

factthattheactivitiesrequiredforsustaininglifeandproperty, or

indeedforimprovinglifeandaugmentingproperty,aremattersof

necessityandnotoffreedom.Whatthemoderneraexpectedof

itsstate,andwhatthisstateindeedachievedtoalargeextent,was

thereleaseofmentodeveloptheirsociallyproductiveenergies,

toproduceincommonthegoodstheyrequiredfora"happy"life.

Thismodernconceptionofpolitics,inwhichthestateisseen

asafunctionofsocietyoranecessaryevilforthesakeofsocial

freedom,hasprevailedinboththeoryandpracticeoverthe

entirelydifferentnotionofapeople'soranation'ssovereignty

whichisinspiredbyantiquityandwhichhasemergedoverand

overagaininalltherevolutionsofthemodernera.Onlyinsuch

revolutions,fromtheAmericanandFrenchintheeighteenthcen-

turydowntotheHungarianRevolutionoftherecentpast,was

thereadirectlinkbetweentheideaofparticipatingingovern-

"AsKingCharlesIofEnglandputitbeforebeingheheaded.-Ed.

'42

IntroductionintoPolitics

mentandtheideaofbeingfree.But,atleastthusfar,these

revolutions-andthedirectexperiencesthey

providedofthe

possibilitiesinherentinpoliticalaction-haveprovedincapable

ofestablishinganewformofstate.Eversincetheriseofthe

nation-state,theprevailingopinionhasbeenthatitisthedutyof

thegovernmenttodefendasociety'sfreedom

againstinternaland

externalenemies,withforceifnecessary.Participationbycitizens

inthegovernment,whateveritsform,hasbeenthoughtnecessary

forfreedom

onlybecausethestate,sinceitmustnecessarilyhave

themeansofforceatitsdisposal,mustbecontrolledbythegov-

ernedinitsemployment ofthatforce.Thereisalsotheadditional

insightthatpowerisgeneratedwiththeestablishmentofasphere

ofpoliticalaction,whateveritsdefinedlimits,andthatfreedom

canprotectitselfonlybyconstantlywatchingovertheexerciseof

suchpower.W

hatwetodayunderstandbyaconstitutionalgov-

ernment,beitmonarchyorrepublic, isessentiallyagovernment

controlledbythegovernedandlimitedinitspowersanduseof

force.Thereisnoquestionthatsuchlimitsandcontrolsexistin

thenameoffreedom,forboththesocietyandtheindividual.The

ideaistolimitthesphereofgovernmentasfarasispossibleand

necessaryinordertorealizefreedom

beyondthereachofgovern-

ment.Thepointisnotsomuch,oratleastnotprimarily,tomake

possiblethefreedomtoactandtobepoliticallyactive.These

remaintheprerogativeofgovernmentandoftheprofessional

politicianswhoofferthemselves,throughtheroundaboutwayof

theparty

system,tothepeopleastheirdeputies,andwhorepre-

sentthepeople'sinterestswithinthestateand,ifoccasionarises,

againstit.Inotherwords,eveninthemoderneratherelation

betweenpoliticsandfreedomistakentomeanthatpoliticsisa

meansandfreedom

itshighestend.The

relationitselfhasnot

changed,althoughthecontentandextentoffreedom

haveunder-

'4.]

'45

guidedandjudged.Ifwethinkofpoliticsbyitsverynature,and

despiteallitspermutations,ashavingarisenoutofthepolisand

beingstillunderitscharge,thenthelinkageofpoliticsandlife

resultsinaninnercontradictionthatcancelsanddestroyswhatis

specificallypoliticalaboutpolitics.

Thiscontradictionfindsitsmostobviousexpressioninthefact

thatithasalwaysbeentheprerogativeofpoliticstodemandof

thoseengagedinitthatundercertaincircumstancestheymust

sacrifice

theirlives.One

canof

course

also

understand

this

demandinthesenseoftheindividualbeingcalledupontosacri-

ficehislifefortheongoinglifeofsociety,andindeeditdoesexists

withinacontextthatatleastsetsalimittoOurriskingOurlives:

Noonecanormayriskhislifeifindoingsoherisksthelifeof

humanity.Wewillreturntothisconnection,ofwhichwehave

becomefullyawareonlybecauseneverbeforehavewehadatOur

disposalthepossibilityofputtinganendbothtohumanityandto

allorganiclife.Thereisinfacthardlyasinglepoliticalcategory

orasinglepoliticalconceptthathasbeenpasseddowntousthat,

whenmeasuredagainstthislatestpossibility,doesnotprovetobe

theoretically

obsolete

andpractically

inapplicable,precisely

becauseinacertainsensewhatisnowatissueforthefirsttimein

foreignpolicyislifeitself,thesurvivalofhumankind.

Bylinkingfreedomtotheverysurvivalofhumankind,wedo

not,however,getridoftheantithesisbetweenfreedomandlife,

thesparkthatfirstignitedallpoliticsandisstillthemeasureforall

specificallypoliticalvirtue.Wemightevenassert,withconsider-

ablejustification,thatthefactthatcontemporarypoliticsiscon-

cernedwiththenakedexistenceofusallisitselftheclearestsign

ofthedisastrousstateinwhichtheworldfindsitself-adisaster

that,alongwithalltherest,threatenstorid

theworldofpolitics.

Forthedangerimposedupon

anyoneventuringintopolitics-

IntroductionintoPolitics

goneextraordinarychange.Thisiswhy

thequestionastothe

meaningofpoliticsisgenerallyansweredtodayincategoriesand

conceptsthatareunusuallyoldandforthatreasonperhapsunusu-

allyesteemed.Andthisdespitethefactthatthemoderneradiffers

justasdecisivelyfrom

allpreviouserasinitspoliticalaspeelasin

itsintellectual ormaterialones.Thesimplefactoftheemancipa-

tionofwomenandoftheworkingclass-thatis,ofsegmentsof

humanity

neverbeforeallowed

toshow

themselvesinpublic

life-putsaradicallynewfaceonallpoliticalquestions.

Asforthedefinitionofpoliticsasameanstoanendthatlies

outsideofit-thatis,tofreedom-itappliesonlytoaverylim-

iteddegreeinthemodernera,eventhoughitismentionedtime

andagain.Ofallthemodernanswerstothequestionofthe

meaningofpolitics,itistheonethatremainsmostcloselylinked

tothetraditionofWesternpoliticalphilosophy;andinthecon-

textofreflectiononthenation-state,itrevealsitselfm

ostclearly

inaprinciplefirstidentifiedby

Rankebutfundamentaltoall

nation-states:theprimacyofforeignpolicy.Butfarmorechar-

acteristicoftheegalitariancharacterof

moderngovernmental

formsandoftheemancipationofworkersandwomen-inwhich

theirmostrevolutionaryaspectisexpressedinpoliticalterms-is

adefinitionofthestatebasedontheprimacyofdomesticpolicy,

accordingtowhich"thestate,astheproprietorofforce,[is)an

indispensableinstitutionoflifeforsociety"(TheodorEschen-

burg,Staat

lUldGesellschaftinDeutschland,p.19).Although,to

besure,theproponentsofthesetwoviews-thatthestateand

politicsareinstitutionsindispensabletofreedom,andthattheyare

institutionsindispensabletolife-arescarcelyawareofit,thetwo

theoriesstandinunbridgeableoppositiontoeachother.Itmakesa

hugedifferencewhetherfreedomorlifeispositedasthehighest

ofallgoods-as

thestandardby

which

allpoliticalactionis

'44

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

,4 '4 1 ',it FfJ tft

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

where,ifeverythingisproceedingasitshould,hisownlifeisthe

lastthingheneedworryabout---doesnotentailthelifeofthe

societyornationorpeopleforwhomhemayhavetosacrificehis

own.Theonlythingindangerisfreedom,bothhisownandthat

ofthegrouptowhichtheindividualbelongs,andwith

it,the

securityofastableworldinwhichthisgroupornationlivesand

thatthelabor ofgenerationshasbuiltinordertoprovideareli-

ableandenduringhomeforallactionandspeech,whicharethe

realpoliticalactivities.Undernormalconditions,thatis,under

thosethathaveprevailedinEuropesinceRomanantiquity,war

wasindeedthecontinuationofpoliticsbyothermeans,andthat

meantthatitcouldalwaysbeavoidedifoneoftheopponents

decidedtoacceptthedemandsof

theother.Thatacceptance

mightwellbeatthecostoffreedom,butnotoflife.

Asweallknow,suchconditionsnolongerexisttoday.W

hen

welookbackonthem,theyseem

aversionofparadiselost.Even

iftheworldweliveincannotbecausallyderivedfrom

themod-

ernperiodorseenasanautomaticprocessinherentinit,our

worldhasneverthelessgrownoutofthesoilofmodernity.In

politicalterms,thismeansthatbothdomesticpolitics,forwhich

thehighestendwaslifeitself,andforeignpolicy,whichoriented

itself onfreedomasitshighestgood,sawtheirrealsubstancein

theuseofbruteforceandactionsthatemployedsuchforce.Ulti-

mately,thecrucialissuewasthatthestateorganizeditself asthe

"possessorofforce"-regardlessofwhethertheultimatepur-

poseofthatforcewasdeterminedbylifeorby

freedom.The

questionofthemeaningofpoliticstoday,however,concernsthe

appropriatenessorinappropriatenessofthepublicmeansofforce

usedforsuchends. W

hatignitesthatquestionisthesimplefact

thatbruteforce,whichissupposedtosafeguardlifeandfreedom,

hasbecomesomonstrouslypowerfulthatitthreatensnotonly

/46

IntroductionintoPolitics

freedombutlifeaswell.Ithasbecomeevidentthatitisthebrute

forceofnationsthatputsintoquestionthelifeprocessofall

humanity,andasaresultthealreadyhighlydubiousanswerthat

themodernworldprovidedastothemeaningofpoliticshasitself

becomedoublyquestionable.

Themonstrousgrowthofthemeansofforceanddestruction

waspossiblenotonlybecauseoftechnologicalinventions,but

alsobecausepolitical,publicspacehaditselfhecomeanarenaof

forcebothinthemodernworld'stheoreticalself-perceptionand

initsbrutalreality.Thisalonemadeitpossiblefortechnologi_

calprogresstobecomeprimarily

progressinthepossibilitiesof

mutualmassdestruction.Sincepowerariseswhereverpeopleact

inconcert,andsincepeople'sconcertedactionsoccuressentially

inthepoliticalarena,thepotentialpowerinherentinallhuman

affairshasmadeitselffeltinaspacedominatedby

force.Asa

result,powerandforceappeartobeidentical,andunderm

odern

conditions,thatisindeedlargelythecase.Butintermsoftheir

originsandintrinsicmeaning,powerandforcearenotidentical,

butinacertainsenseopposites.Whereverforce,whichisactually

aphenomenonoftheindividualorthefew,iscombinedwith

power,which

ispossibleonlyamongthemany,theresultisa

monstrousincreaseinpotentialforce:Thoughderivedfrom

the

powerofanorganizedspace,it,likeeverypotentialforce,grows

anddevelopsattheexpenseofpower.

Eversincetheinventionofatomicweapons,theforemost

politicalissueofourtimehasbeenthequestionastowhatrole

forceshouldhaveininternationalaffairsandlorhowtheemploy-

mentofthemeansofforcecanbeexcludedfrom

international

affairs.Butthephenomenon

offorcepredominatingatthe

expenseofallotherpoliticalfactorsisolder;itfirstappearedin

WorldWarI,with

itshugemechanizedbattleson

thewestern

'47

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

front.Irshouldbenotedthatthisdisastrousnewroleforforce,

whichdevelopedautomaticallyout ofitselfandconstantlygrew

amongallparticipants,caughtunprepared

nations,politicians,

andpublicopiniontotallybysurprise.Andinfactthegrowthof

forceinthepublic,governmentalspherehad,sotospeak,taken

placebehindthebacksofthoseactinginthatsphere--duringa

centurythatmightbecountedamongthemostpeacefulor,letus

say,leastviolentinhistory.Itwasnotwithoutgoodreasonthat

themodernworld-whichwithgreaterdeterminationthanever

beforeregardedpoliticsasonlyameanstothepreservationand

promotionofasociety'slifeandthereforestrovetoreducepoliti-

calprerogativestoanessential minimum-cametobelieve,not

unjustifiably,thatitcoulddealwith

theproblemofforcebetter

than

allpreviouscenturies.Whatitinfactachieved

wasthe

almosttotalexclusionofbruteforce,oftheimmediatedomi-

nationofmanoverman,fromtheconstantlyexpandingsphere

ofsociallife.The

emancipationof

theworking

classandof

women-therwocategoriesofhumanbeingswhohadbeensub-

jecttoforcethroughoutpremodernhistory-clearlyrepresents

thehighpointofthisdevelopment.

Fornowletussetasidethequestionwhetherthisdecreasein

bruteforceinthelifeofsocietyisinrealitytobeequatedwitha

gaininhumanfreedom. lntermsofourpoliticaltradition,inany

case, notbeingfreecanmeanoneofrwothings.Itoccursfirst

whenapersonissubjecttotheforceofauother,butitalsooccurs,

indeedinthem

oreoriginalsense,whenapersonissubjecttolife's

nakednecessities.Laboristheactivity

thatcorrespondstothe

coercionbywhichlifeitselfforcesustoprovideourselveswith

thesenecessities.Inallpremodernsocieties,apersoncouldfree

himselffrom

thislabor bycoercingotherstolaborforhim,that

is,by

forceanddomination.In

modernsociety,thelaborer

148

IntroductionintoPolitics

issubjecttono

bruteforceandno

domination;he

iscoerced

bythedirectnecessity

inherentinlifeitself.Here,then,neces-

sityreplacesforce,butthequestionremains:Isiteasiertoresist

thecoercionofbruteforceorafnecessity?Moreover,theover-

alldevelopmentofsociety-atleastuntilitreachesthepoint

whereautomationtrulydoesawaywithlabor-ismovinguni-

formlytowardmakingallitsmembers"laborers,"humanbeings

whoseactivity,whateveritmaybe,primarily

servestoprovide

life's

necessities.Inthissense,too,theexclusionofbruteforce

from

thelifeof

societyhasfornowresultedonlyinleaving

anincomparablylargerspacethaneverbeforetothenecessity

lifeimposeson

everyone.Necessity,notfreedom,rulesthelife

ofsociety;anditisnotbychancethattheconceptofnecessity

hascometodominateallm

odernphilosophiesofhistory,where

modernthoughthassoughttofinditsphilosophicalorientation

andself-understanding.

Thisdisplacementofforcefrom

boththeprivatespaceofthe

householdandthesemipublicsphereofsocietywasundertaken

quite

consciously.Inorderforpeopletoexistwithoutforcein

daily

life,therehadtobe

anincreaseintheforceemployed

bythepublichand,by

thestate,whoseuseofforce,soitwas

believed,couldbekeptundercontrolsinceithadbeenexplicitly

definedasameremeanstowardthegreaterendofthelifeofsoci-

ety,of

thefreedevelopmentofproductiveenergies.Itnever

occurredtothemodernmindthatthemeansofbruteforcecould

themselvesbecome"productive"-thatis,thattheycouldgrow

inthesameway(andtoanevengreaterextent)thanotherpro-

ductiveenergiesinsociety-becausetherealsphereofproduc-

tivitywasassociatedwith

societyandnotthestate.By

itsnature

thestatewasconsideredanunproductiveand,inextremecases,

parasiticalphenomenon.Preciselybecauseforcehadbeenlimited

'49

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

totherealmofthestate,whichinconstitutionalgovernmentswas

subjecttothecontrolofsocietythroughthepartysystem,itwas

believedthatforcehadbeenreducedtoaminimum

thatwould

remain-constant.

Weknow

thatjusttheoppositewasthecase.The

epoch

regardedashistoricallythemostpeacefulandleastviolentled

directlytothegreatest,mosthorrendous

developmentof

the

meansofforce.Thisonlyappearstobeaparadox.Whatnoone

hadreckoned

with

wasthespecificcombinationofforceand

powerthatcouldariseoulyinthepublicrealmof

thestate,

becauseonlytheredomencometogetherandgeneratepower. It

makesnodifferencehownarrowlyonedefinestheprerogativesof

thisrealm,howpreciselyaconstitutionandothercontrolssetlim-

itstoit;thefactthatitisapublic,politicalarenageneratespower;

andthispowermust,ofcourse,endindisasterif,asinmodern

times,itisfocusedalmostexclusivelyonbruteforce,sincethis

sameforcehasbeentransferredout oftheprivatesphereofthe

individualandintothepublicsphereof

themany.However

absolutetheforcethatthemaster ofahouseholdinpremodern

timesmighthaveexercisedoverhisfamily,definedinthelargest

sense-anditwascertainlygreatenoughtolabelsuchahouse-

holdadespoticregimeinthefullsenseoftheterm-thisforce

wasnonethelessalwayslimitedtotheindividualwhoexercisedit.

Itwasathoroughlyimpotentforcethatremainedsterileinterms

ofbotheconomicsandpolitics.Howeverdisastroustheexercise

ofsuchforcewasforthosesubjectedtoitwithinahousehold,the

meansofforcecouldofthemselvesneverflourishundersuch

conditions.Theycouldnotbecomeadangertoall,becausethere

wasnomonopolyonforce.

Weobservedthatthenotionthatpoliticsisarealmofmeans,

whose

ends

andstandardshave

tobe

soughtoutsideit,

is

,50

lntroduetc."onintoPolitics

extremelyoldandvenerable.Nonethelesswhatwearedealing

withhereandwhathasbecomesodubiousaboutrecentdevelop-

mentsarethoseverysamenotions,which,although

originally

borderlineissuesperipheraltopolitics-thatis,thebruteforce

sometimesnecessaryforthedefenseofpoliticsandthoseprovi-

sionsforsustaininglifethatmustfirstbesecuredbeforepolitical

freedomispossible-havenowmovedtothecenterofallpoliti-

calactivitybyapplyingforceasthemeanswhosehighestendis

supposedtobesustainingandorganizinglife.Thecrisisliesinthe

factthatthepoliticalarenanowthreatenspreciselywhatonce

appearedtobeitssolejustification.Inthissituation,thequestion

aboutthemeaningofpoliticsisitselfaltered.Thequestiontoday

ishardly, W

hatisthemeaningofpolitics?Forthosepeopleall

overtheworldwhofeelthreatenedbypolitics,amongwhomthe

verybestarethosewho

consciouslydistancethemselvesfrom

politics,thefarmorerelevantquestiontheyaskthemselvesand

othersis,Doespoliticsstillhaveanymeaningatall?

Underlyingthesequestions

aretheviews,briefly

sketched

above,concerningwhatpoliticsreallyis.Theseviewshavehardly

changedoverthecourseofmanycenturies.Theonlyrealchange

isthatwhatwasoriginallythesubstanceofjudgmentsbasedon

certainimmediateandlegitimateexperiences-forexample,the

judgmentandcondemnationofpoliticsonthebasisoftheexperi-

enceofthephilosopherortheChristian,butalsothecorrectionof

suchjudgmentsandalimitedjustificationofpolitics-evolved

longagointoprejudices.Prejudiceshavecometoplayanincreas-

inglylargeandlegitimateroleinthepolitical,publicarena.They

areareflectionofthosethingsweallautomaticallysharewithone

anotherbutno

longermakejudgmentsaboutbecauseweno

longerhaveanyrealopportunitytoexperiencethem

directly.All

suchprejudices, totheextentthattheyarelegitimateandnotjust

l5,

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

meresmalltalk,arejudgmentsfOtmedinthepast.Noonecanlive

withoutthembecausealifecompletelyfreeofprejudicewould

demandasuperhumanalertness,aconstantreadinesstoconfront

andbe

confronted

bythetotalityof

therealworldatevery

moment,asifeverydaywerethefirstdayorLastDayofcrea-

tion.Prejudicesandstupidchatterarenotthesamething.Pre-

ciselybecauseprejudicesalwayshaveaninherentlegitimacy,one

mayactuallyriskconfrontingthem

onlyiftheynolongerful-

filltheirfunction,andthatmeansonlywhentheyarenolonger

suitableforrelievingthepersonmakingajudgmentfromthebur-

denofsomeportionofreality.Butitispreciselyatthatpoint,

whenprejudicescomeintoconflictwith

reality,thattheystartto

becomedangerous,andpeople,who

nolongerfeelprotected

bythem

intheirthinking,begintoembellishthem

andturnthem

intothebasisofthatsortofperversionoftheorythatwecom-

monlycall"ideologies"or"worldviews."Itneverdoesanygood

toopposeanideologyderivedfrom

prejudicewith

somecurrent

antitheticalworldview. Theonlythingthathelpsistoattemptto

replaceprejudiceswithjudgments. Indoingso,weareinevitably

ledbacktothejudgmentscontainedinprejudicesand,inturn,

totheexperienceswhicharecontainedwithinthem

andfrom

whichtheyfirstsprang.

Inourcurrentcrisis,theprejudicesthatstandinthewayof

atheoreticalunderstandingofwhatpoliticsisreallyaboutinvolve

nearlyallthepoliticalcategoriesinwhichweareaccustomedto

think,butabovealltheypertaintothemeans/endcategorythat

regardspoliticsinterms ofanendpurposelyingoutsideofpoli-

tics,aswellastothenotionthatthesubstanceofpoliticsisbrute

forceand,finally,totheconvictionthatdominationisthecentral

concept ofallpoliticaltheory.Allthesejudgmentsandprejudices

arisefrom

amistrustofpoliticsthatmostcertainlyisnotunjusti-

152

lntroductr."onintoPolitics

fied.Butinourpresentprejudiceagainstpolitics,thisancientmis-

trusthasbeentransformedyetagain.Eversincetheinventionof

theatomicbomb,ourmistrusthasbeenbasedontheeminently

justifiablefearthatpoliticsandthemeansofforceavailableto

itmaywelldestroyhumanity.Outofthisfeararisesthehope

thatmenwillcometotheirsensesandrid

theworldofpolitics

insteadofhumankind.Andthishopeisnolessjustifiablethanthe

fear.Forthenotionthatpoliticsexistsalwaysandeverywhere

humanheingsexistisitselfaprejudice,andthesocialistidealofa

stateless-andforMarxthatmeansapolitics-less-finalcondi-

tionforhumanity

isnotatallutopian.Itissimp!yappalling.

Unfortunately,Marxwasamuchbetterhistorianthantheoreti-

cian,andinhistheoriesheoftensimplyexpressedandputinto

sharperconceptualfocushistoricaltendenciesthatcouldbeobjec-

tivelydemonstrated.Theatrophyofthepoliticalrealmisoneof

thoseobjectivelydemonstrabletendenciesofthemodernera.

Itliesinthenatureofoursubject-wherewealwaysdealwith

themanyandtheworldthatarisesbetweenthem-thatourdis-

cussionoughtnevertoneglectpublicopinion.Accordingtopub-

licopinion,however,thequestionaboutthemeaningofpolitics

todayhasbeenenkindledbythethreatthatwarandatomicweap-

onsrepresentforhumankind.And

soitisonlylogicalthatwe

continueourdiscussionwithareflectiononthequestionofwar.

TheQuestionofW

arWhenthefirstatomicbombfellonHiroshima,preparingtheway

foranunexpectedlyquickendtoWorldWarII,awaveofhorror

passedovertheworld.Atthetime,noonecouldknow

justhow

justifiablethathorrorwas,forby

levelingan

entirecityone

atomicbombaccomplishedinonlyafewminuteswhatthesys-

tematicdeploymentof

massiveairattackswouldhave

taken

,s.]

THEPROMISEOFPOLITICS

weeksormonthstodo.ThebornhardmentofCoventry

madeit

deartoexperts,andthemassivebombattacksonGermancities

madeitcleartotheentireworld,thatonceagain,justasinthe

ancientworld,warcouldnotonlydecimateapeoplebutalsoturn

theworldtheyinhabitintoadesert.Germanywasalreadyin

ruins,itscapitalcityaheapofrubble,butwithintheframework

ofmodernwarfareandthusinthesphereofhumanor,better,

interhumanaffairs,whichiswhatpoliticsisabout,theatomic

bombofWorldWarIIwas-thoughitrepresentedsomething

absolutelynewinthehistoryofscience-nothingmorethana

culminatingpoint,achieved,sotospeak,byoneshortjumpOr

shortcircuit,towardwhicheventsinanycasehadbeenmovingat

aneveracceleratingpace.

Theuseofthemeansofforcetodestroytheworldandannihi-

latehumanlifeis,moreover,neithernewnorhorrifying,andthe

peoplewhohavealwaysbelievedthatacategoricalcondemnation

offorceultimatelyamountstoacondemnationofpoliticsingen-

eralhaveceasedtobecorrectonlyinthelastfewyears,or,more

precisely,sincetheinventionof

thehydrogen

bomb.In

the

destructionoftheworld,nothingisdestroyedexceptastructure

madebyhumanhands,andthebruteforcerequiredforitcorre-

spondspreciselytotheviolencenecessarilyinherentinallhuman

productiveprocesses.Themeansofforceneededfordestruction

are,asitwere,madeinthelikenessofthetoolsofproduction,and

thetechnicalinstrumentariumofeveryageincludesboth.W

hat

menproducecaninturnbedestroyedbymen;whattheydestroy

canberebuilt. Theabilitytodestroyandtheabilitytoproduce

standinbalance,onewiththeother.Theenergywhichdestroys

theworldanddoesviolencetoitisthesameenergythatisinour

ownhandsandbymeansofwhichwedoviolencetonatureand

destroysomenaturalthing-atree,forinstance,tosupplyus

154

IntroductionintoPolitics

with

woodandtomakesomethingwoodenfrom-inorderto

buildourworld.

Thepropositionthattheabilitytodestroyandtheabilityto

producestaudinbalance isnot,however,unconditional.Itisvalid

onlyforwhatisproducedbymen,notforthelesstangiblebutno

lessrealrealmofhumanrelationshipsthatarisefrom

actioninthe

broadestsenseoftheterm.W

ewillreturntothislater.Thecru-

cialpointforourpresentsituationisthatintherealworldof

things,thebalancebetweendestructionandreconstructioncanbe

maintainedonlyaslongasthetechnologyinvolveddealswith

nothingexceptpureproduction;sincethediscoveryofatomic

energy,thisisnolongerthecase,eventhoughforthemostpart

westillliveinaworlddefinedbytheindustrialrevolution.But

eveninthisman-madeworldwearenolongerdealingsolelywith

naturalthings

thatreappeartransformed

into

onethingor

another,butalsowithnaturalprocessescreatedbyhumanbeings

inimitationofnatureandintroduceddirecdyintothehuman

world. Itischaracteristicoftheseprocessesthat,liketheprocess

inaninternalcornhustionengine,theyOccurprimarily

inthe

formofexplosions,whichinhistoricaltermsmeansintheformof

catastrophes,wherebyeachsuchexplosionorcatastrophedrives

theprocessitselfforward.InalmosteveryaspectofOurlives

today,we findourselvesinjustsuchaprocess,inwhichexplosions

andcatastrophesdonotresultinourdoombutratherconstitute

anunceasingprogressdrivenbythosesameexplosions-though

inthiscontextweshalldisregardfornow

theambiguousvalueof

thissortofprogress.Intermsofpolitics,suchprogresscanper-

hapsbebestgraspedbyconsideringhowGermany'scatastrophic

defeathasplayedanessentialroleinmakingGermanythemost

modernandadvancedcountryinEuropetoday,whereasother

countrieslagbehind,eitherbecausethey

arenotshaped

so

155