|
Europe’s Futures Colloquium with Hanna Shelest
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Hanna ShelestIvan Vejvoda
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
How Could Art Reflect on Trauma?
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Katherine YoungerLia Dostlieva
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
"Difficult to Settle" Refugees in Post-War Trieste
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ayşe ÇağlarPamela Ballinger
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Following Anti-Gender Movements in Europe: What’s Next?
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Mieke VerlooTatev Hovhannisyan
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Telling History: On Creating the Polish History Museum and its Exhibitions
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Dariusz StolaLudger HagedornRobert Kostro
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
What is Political Cruelty?
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Aishwary Kumar
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
“The important point for liberalism is not so much where the line is drawn,” Judith Shklar writes in a fascinating moment in her critique of cruelty, “as that it be drawn, and that it must under no circumstances be ignored or forgotten.” Where is this line? And who lives under its ambiguous constitutionality? Neither in her 1989 theses on the “liberalism of fear” nor in her 1982 demand that liberals start “putting cruelty first” does Shklar fully pursue the consequences of this morally unforgiving yet spatially uncertain line of liberal intolerance of cruelty. And while she does starkly pose the question “what is moral cruelty?” in terms of its debilitating effect on human freedom, the limit—border—that circumscribes liberalism’s constitutional response to extreme violence continues to waver. In this paper, Aishwary Kumar offers an archeology of this vacillating, political “line” that runs through liberal resistance against cruelty. By way of exploring its global implications, he follows Shklar on the cosmopolitical path she takes, along with BR Ambedkar and Hannah Arendt, into that “most ancient,” most exemplary form of organized violence and constitutional stasis known to legal and moral philosophy: the “Indo-European caste society,” which in her later writings Shklar sometimes replaces by the adjacent term “warrior society.” Her legalism is not causal. For it is in that trans-continental tradition that a relation is forged between caste and war, and the sovereignty of the line—maryada—attains its apotheosis. Might a semblance of political courage still be retrieved from that tradition of cruelty—a modern part of which becomes genuinely “anticolonial”—and rehabilitated into norms of democratic government today?
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
“The important point for liberalism is not so much where the line is drawn,” Judith Shklar writes in a fascinating moment in her critique of cruelty, “as that it be drawn, and that it must under no circumstances be ignored or forgotten.” Where is this line? And who lives under its ambiguous constitutionality? Neither in her 1989 theses on the “liberalism of fear” nor in her 1982 demand that liberals start “putting cruelty first” does Shklar fully pursue the consequences of this morally unforgiving yet spatially uncertain line of liberal intolerance of cruelty. And while she does starkly pose the question “what is moral cruelty?” in terms of its debilitating effect on human freedom, the limit—border—that circumscribes liberalism’s constitutional response to extreme violence continues to waver. In this paper, Aishwary Kumar offers an archeology of this vacillating, political “line” that runs through liberal resistance against cruelty. By way of exploring its global implications, he follows Shklar on the cosmopolitical path she takes, along with BR Ambedkar and Hannah Arendt, into that “most ancient,” most exemplary form of organized violence and constitutional stasis known to legal and moral philosophy: the “Indo-European caste society,” which in her later writings Shklar sometimes replaces by the adjacent term “warrior society.” Her legalism is not causal. For it is in that trans-continental tradition that a relation is forged between caste and war, and the sovereignty of the line—maryada—attains its apotheosis. Might a semblance of political courage still be retrieved from that tradition of cruelty—a modern part of which becomes genuinely “anticolonial”—and rehabilitated into norms of democratic government today?
Read more
|
|
Notes on Militant Populism in Contemporary France
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Winnie Lem
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
People of the Mountain
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ivan VejvodaKapka Kassabova
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
For millennia, the people of the Mesta Valley have lived in an intimate relationship with their environment. Kapka Kassabova's enquiry is into the nature of this relationship as it survives today, after a succession of mass traumas in the 20th century have made their mark. They include political persecution during Communism, economic upheaval in the wake of the collapse of the planned economy, environmental degradation during and after Communism, migration, endemic state corruption, climate change, and a generational shift from a traditional, agricultural way of life towards a globalised, digitalised, uprooted way of life. His focus is on the Pomak (indigenous Muslim) and mixed villages here. An interesting phenomenon can be observed: permanent emigration is rare. These communities are held together by invisible factors that cannot be accounted for by pure economics.
The villages of the Mesta Valley are remarkable for several things: their exceptionally rich biosphere where some of Europe’s cleanest foods, animals, and medicinal herbs thrive; their rich tradition of cultural syncretism; their existential endurance in the face of trauma, and the fact that they export the greatest amount of cheap seasonal labour to Western Europe – the fruit pickers, planters, and builders on whom the wealthier European economies depend.
Read more
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
For millennia, the people of the Mesta Valley have lived in an intimate relationship with their environment. Kapka Kassabova's enquiry is into the nature of this relationship as it survives today, after a succession of mass traumas in the 20th century have made their mark. They include political persecution during Communism, economic upheaval in the wake of the collapse of the planned economy, environmental degradation during and after Communism, migration, endemic state corruption, climate change, and a generational shift from a traditional, agricultural way of life towards a globalised, digitalised, uprooted way of life. His focus is on the Pomak (indigenous Muslim) and mixed villages here. An interesting phenomenon can be observed: permanent emigration is rare. These communities are held together by invisible factors that cannot be accounted for by pure economics.
The villages of the Mesta Valley are remarkable for several things: their exceptionally rich biosphere where some of Europe’s cleanest foods, animals, and medicinal herbs thrive; their rich tradition of cultural syncretism; their existential endurance in the face of trauma, and the fact that they export the greatest amount of cheap seasonal labour to Western Europe – the fruit pickers, planters, and builders on whom the wealthier European economies depend.
Read more
|
|
Das Leben Passiert Nicht Außerhalb der Geschichte
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Radka DenemarkováLudger Hagedorn
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
|
Fluid Zones of Hegemony
|
|
Seminars and Colloquia
|
Ayşe ÇağlarEzgican Özdemir
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|
Series: Seminars and Colloquia
|