Nationalismus als Umkehr: Etwas zur jüdischen Meta-Politik der Moderne

IF 0.2 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Naharaim Pub Date : 2022-05-16 DOI:10.1515/naha-2021-0015
Asher D. Biemann
{"title":"Nationalismus als Umkehr: Etwas zur jüdischen Meta-Politik der Moderne","authors":"Asher D. Biemann","doi":"10.1515/naha-2021-0015","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract “Metapolitics” is an ambiguous term. Recent philosophers have claimed the concept for neo-conservative, even right-wing agendas, while others have employed it to signal radical discontent with politics altogether. Beginning with Peter Viereck’s characterization of Nazi ideology as “Meta-Politics,” this essay works its way back from an “irrational,” “volkish,” and supposedly “conservative” concept to another use of “Metapolitics” as found in Martin Buber and Hermann Cohen that was rooted in a liberal tradition of the Enlightenment—especially in August Schlözer and Saul Ascher. Both, Buber and Cohen, linked “metapolitical politics” to prophetic and theopolitical sensibilities. As such, the prophetic motif of turning (Teshuvah) loomed large at the center of their respective philosophies of nationalism. But it was a theme that also connected a wide range of thinkers, including Hans Kohn and Leo Baeck, and which emerged as a Leitmotiv of cultural and spiritual Zionism as well as of the modern Renaissance of Jewish culture. Drawing on Moritz Lazarus, the essay argues that the recurring trope of turning helped establish a paradoxical nationalism founded not upon self-empowerment and political othering but on self-criticism. Concluding with a brief excursion on Abraham Joshua Heschel’s prophetic politics in the Civil Rights Movement, the essay gestures towards the possibility of nationalism as collective introspection and self-reformation.","PeriodicalId":40309,"journal":{"name":"Naharaim","volume":"16 1","pages":"3 - 27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Naharaim","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/naha-2021-0015","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract “Metapolitics” is an ambiguous term. Recent philosophers have claimed the concept for neo-conservative, even right-wing agendas, while others have employed it to signal radical discontent with politics altogether. Beginning with Peter Viereck’s characterization of Nazi ideology as “Meta-Politics,” this essay works its way back from an “irrational,” “volkish,” and supposedly “conservative” concept to another use of “Metapolitics” as found in Martin Buber and Hermann Cohen that was rooted in a liberal tradition of the Enlightenment—especially in August Schlözer and Saul Ascher. Both, Buber and Cohen, linked “metapolitical politics” to prophetic and theopolitical sensibilities. As such, the prophetic motif of turning (Teshuvah) loomed large at the center of their respective philosophies of nationalism. But it was a theme that also connected a wide range of thinkers, including Hans Kohn and Leo Baeck, and which emerged as a Leitmotiv of cultural and spiritual Zionism as well as of the modern Renaissance of Jewish culture. Drawing on Moritz Lazarus, the essay argues that the recurring trope of turning helped establish a paradoxical nationalism founded not upon self-empowerment and political othering but on self-criticism. Concluding with a brief excursion on Abraham Joshua Heschel’s prophetic politics in the Civil Rights Movement, the essay gestures towards the possibility of nationalism as collective introspection and self-reformation.
作为逆转的民族主义:关于犹太现代性元政治的思考
摘要“元政治”是一个模棱两可的术语。最近的哲学家们声称这个概念是新保守主义,甚至是右翼议程的概念,而其他人则用它来表达对政治的彻底不满。从彼得·维耶雷克(Peter Viereck)将纳粹意识形态描述为“元政治”开始,这篇文章从一个“非理性”、“volkish”和所谓的“保守”概念,回到了马丁·布伯(Martin Buber)和赫尔曼·科恩(Hermann Cohen)对“元政治学”的另一种使用,这种使用植根于启蒙运动的自由主义传统,尤其是奥古斯特·施洛泽(August Schlözer)和索尔·阿舍尔(Saul Ascher)。布伯和科恩都将“元政治”与先知和神权政治情感联系在一起。因此,转向的预言主题(Teshuvah)在他们各自的民族主义哲学中占据了重要地位。但这一主题也将包括Hans Kohn和Leo Baeck在内的众多思想家联系在一起,并成为文化和精神犹太复国主义以及现代犹太文化复兴的主题。这篇文章借鉴了莫里茨·拉扎勒斯的观点,认为反复出现的转向比喻有助于建立一种矛盾的民族主义,这种民族主义不是建立在自我赋权和政治他人之上,而是建立在自我批评之上。文章最后对亚伯拉罕·约书亚·赫歇尔在民权运动中的预言性政治进行了简短的考察,指出民族主义作为集体反省和自我改造的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Naharaim
Naharaim HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书