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