Group blog

« Law and Literature and the Right to Death | Main | Agamben and Derrida on language and the political »

02/05/2006

Comments

Jodi

Thanks for this. Wolin is an absolutely insufferable moron (who, like many, thinks that he is a genius). Rumor has it that the big H himself wasn't (at least initially) particularly impressed with Wolin but that he and some others (who will go unnamed) wanted more counter Heideggerian/Derridean forces and pro Habermas forces and so helped him along (endorsements, recommendations, etc). It's like the wanted to corner the market on what counts as rational and just. I fully agree that the Nation shouldn't give credence to the likes of RW.

Matt

Not to leap to any unqualified defense of The Nation's historical record, but it does seem like they've made some amends in recent years, with regard to Derrida at least.

For these I mostly credit their recent intern, who happens to be a good friend.

AT

Thanks, Matt (and to your friend the intern); I'm delighted to be corrected about that.

Previn Karian

I'm not expert with all this stuff - but can someone explain Heidegger's refusal to renounce his Nazi support? - in fact, can someone even explain wtf Heidegger was doing WITH the Nazis? That seems to be the compelling starting point for Wolin's ire. Next up is the fact that 'there's something rotten in the state of Denmark' (Hamlet) - ie whilst philosophy and humanism may be seductive, they don't serve well when it comes to killing the tyrant king or stopping the poisoning of the unfaithful queen - ie as Carl Schmitt indicates and Freud confirms, politics requires violence, and the Nazi's required violent opposition without which they would never have been stopped - a violence that Heidegger would prefer did not exist - but it does.

The comments to this entry are closed.