After Englobement: Carl Schmitt, Peter Sloterdijk, and the Rediscovery of the Uncompressible

Q1 Social Sciences
Ethan Stoneman
{"title":"After Englobement: Carl Schmitt, Peter Sloterdijk, and the Rediscovery of the Uncompressible","authors":"Ethan Stoneman","doi":"10.1215/17432197-8593508","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This article positions Peter Sloterdijk's spheres project against Carl Schmitt's spatial writings, showing that Sloterdijk's anthropo-philosophical approach to spatial analysis implies a theoretical strategy for thinking beyond Schmitt's fatalistic view of the deep contingencies shaping human social existence. Schmitt's spatial pessimism is particularly noticeable in Land and Sea, in which he recounts the unfolding of world history as a succession of spatial epochs, arguing that the modern era can best be understood as the achievement of a centuries-long path toward a unified global space of nihilistic anarchy—a development that he comes to refer to as englobement. The legacy of Schmitt's spatial history of modernity can be seen most urgently today by its influence on the emergent right-wing identitarian and neo-Eurasian movements, which seek to transform Schmitt's pessimistic nostalgia for a prior mode of spatial ordering into an expansionist geopolitics. The author maintains that, against that legacy, Sloterdijk proposes \"spherology,\" a unique practice of spatial anthropology through which he teases out an art of writing at the service of experience, seeking to understand the phenomenon of human togetherness not in terms of determinate political or territorial forms but as a function of shared spaces (spheres) set up and stretched out through shared living in them. By affirming and potentially informing the ever-renewable possibility of lived extendedness in local-shared enclosures, Sloterdijk's theorization of the spatial constitutes a compelling countercurrent or immunological defense against the forces of nostalgia and resignation that feed into reactionary spatial thought.","PeriodicalId":35197,"journal":{"name":"Cultural Politics","volume":"17 1","pages":"303 - 321"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cultural Politics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1215/17432197-8593508","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract:This article positions Peter Sloterdijk's spheres project against Carl Schmitt's spatial writings, showing that Sloterdijk's anthropo-philosophical approach to spatial analysis implies a theoretical strategy for thinking beyond Schmitt's fatalistic view of the deep contingencies shaping human social existence. Schmitt's spatial pessimism is particularly noticeable in Land and Sea, in which he recounts the unfolding of world history as a succession of spatial epochs, arguing that the modern era can best be understood as the achievement of a centuries-long path toward a unified global space of nihilistic anarchy—a development that he comes to refer to as englobement. The legacy of Schmitt's spatial history of modernity can be seen most urgently today by its influence on the emergent right-wing identitarian and neo-Eurasian movements, which seek to transform Schmitt's pessimistic nostalgia for a prior mode of spatial ordering into an expansionist geopolitics. The author maintains that, against that legacy, Sloterdijk proposes "spherology," a unique practice of spatial anthropology through which he teases out an art of writing at the service of experience, seeking to understand the phenomenon of human togetherness not in terms of determinate political or territorial forms but as a function of shared spaces (spheres) set up and stretched out through shared living in them. By affirming and potentially informing the ever-renewable possibility of lived extendedness in local-shared enclosures, Sloterdijk's theorization of the spatial constitutes a compelling countercurrent or immunological defense against the forces of nostalgia and resignation that feed into reactionary spatial thought.
战后:卡尔·施密特,彼得·斯洛特戴克,和不可压缩的再发现
摘要:本文将斯洛特戴克的领域项目与卡尔·施密特的空间写作进行对比,表明斯洛特戴克的人类哲学空间分析方法暗示了一种超越施密特关于塑造人类社会存在的深层偶然性的宿命论观点的理论策略。施密特的空间悲观主义在《陆地与海洋》中尤为引人注目,他将世界历史的展开描述为一系列空间时代,认为现代时代最好被理解为通往虚无无政府主义统一的全球空间的长达几个世纪的道路的成就——他将这种发展称为融合。施米特现代性空间历史的遗产今天可以通过其对新兴的右翼认同主义和新欧亚运动的影响最为紧迫地看到,这些运动试图将施米特对先前空间秩序模式的悲观怀旧转变为扩张主义的地缘政治。作者坚持认为,与这种传统相反,斯洛特戴克提出了“球体学”,这是空间人类学的一种独特实践,通过这种实践,他梳理出一种为经验服务的写作艺术,试图理解人类团结的现象,不是从确定的政治或领土形式的角度,而是从共享空间(球体)的功能出发,通过共同生活在其中而建立和延伸。通过肯定和潜在地告知在地方共享的圈地中生活延伸的不断更新的可能性,Sloterdijk的空间理论构成了一种令人信服的逆流或免疫防御,以对抗怀旧和放弃的力量,这些力量流入反动的空间思想。
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
Cultural Politics
Cultural Politics Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: Cultural Politics is an international, refereed journal that explores the global character and effects of contemporary culture and politics. Cultural Politics explores precisely what is cultural about politics and what is political about culture. Publishing across the arts, humanities, and social sciences, the journal welcomes articles from different political positions, cultural approaches, and geographical locations. Cultural Politics publishes work that analyzes how cultural identities, agencies and actors, political issues and conflicts, and global media are linked, characterized, examined, and resolved. In so doing, the journal supports the innovative study of established, embryonic, marginalized, or unexplored regions of cultural politics. Cultural Politics, while embodying the interdisciplinary coverage and discursive critical spirit of contemporary cultural studies, emphasizes how cultural theories and practices intersect with and elucidate analyses of political power. The journal invites articles on representation and visual culture; modernism and postmodernism; media, film, and communications; popular and elite art forms; the politics of production and consumption; language; ethics and religion; desire and psychoanalysis; art and aesthetics; the culture industry; technologies; academics and the academy; cities, architecture, and the spatial; global capitalism; Marxism; value and ideology; the military, weaponry, and war; power, authority, and institutions; global governance and democracy; political parties and social movements; human rights; community and cosmopolitanism; transnational activism and change; the global public sphere; the body; identity and performance; heterosexual, transsexual, lesbian, and gay sexualities; race, blackness, whiteness, and ethnicity; the social inequalities of the global and the local; patriarchy, feminism, and gender studies; postcolonialism; and political activism.
×
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