Das Private ist politisch, das Politische ist privat. Korrespondenzen zwischen familiärer und staatlicher Ordnung im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert – und heute

D. Thomä
{"title":"Das Private ist politisch, das Politische ist privat. Korrespondenzen zwischen familiärer und staatlicher Ordnung im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert – und heute","authors":"D. Thomä","doi":"10.6094/behemoth.2011.4.3.659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines three different ways of establishing connections between political models and the realm of the family. It scrutinizes and criticizes the patriarchal homology between political and private father figures (Filmer vs. Locke), casts light on the political bearings of sympathetic rela- tions which are modeled based on maternal love (Adam Smith and Condorcet), and examines the revolutionary ideal of fraternity (Friedrich Schiller). The author distinguishes symbolic (paternal), synergetic (fraternal) and sympathetic relations and analyzes their bearings for modern democracies. He takes issue with the liberal separation between the private and the political, as it tends to lose sight of the marked correspondences between these spheres. He also questions the conservative idea of a family compensating for the discontent in the public realm. Gender concepts and generational issues turn out to be intertwined with theories of the political.","PeriodicalId":30203,"journal":{"name":"Behemoth a Journal on Civilisation","volume":"4 1","pages":"23-56"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behemoth a Journal on Civilisation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.6094/behemoth.2011.4.3.659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines three different ways of establishing connections between political models and the realm of the family. It scrutinizes and criticizes the patriarchal homology between political and private father figures (Filmer vs. Locke), casts light on the political bearings of sympathetic rela- tions which are modeled based on maternal love (Adam Smith and Condorcet), and examines the revolutionary ideal of fraternity (Friedrich Schiller). The author distinguishes symbolic (paternal), synergetic (fraternal) and sympathetic relations and analyzes their bearings for modern democracies. He takes issue with the liberal separation between the private and the political, as it tends to lose sight of the marked correspondences between these spheres. He also questions the conservative idea of a family compensating for the discontent in the public realm. Gender concepts and generational issues turn out to be intertwined with theories of the political.
私人便是私事政治才是私事我好浪漫,华盛顿和18 .世纪与现在
本文考察了在政治模式和家庭领域之间建立联系的三种不同方式。它审视和批判了政治和私人父亲形象之间的父权同源性(菲尔默与洛克),揭示了以母爱为模型的同情关系的政治意义(亚当·斯密和孔多塞),并审视了博爱的革命理想(弗里德里希·席勒)。作者区分了象征关系(父系关系)、协同关系(兄弟关系)和同情关系,并分析了它们对现代民主的影响。他对自由主义将私人和政治区分开来的观点提出了质疑,因为它往往忽视了这些领域之间明显的对应关系。他还质疑用家庭来补偿公共领域不满情绪的保守观念。性别概念和代际问题与政治理论交织在一起。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信