Heterogeneities, slave-princes, and Marshall Plans

Schmitt's reception in Hegel's France

Stefanos Geroulanos

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    This essay examines the French reception of the Carl Schmitt's thought, specifically its Hegelian strand. Beginning with the early readings of Schmitt's thought by Alexandre Kojéve and Georges Bataille during the mid-1930s, it attends to the partial adoption of Schmitt's friend/enemy distinction and his theories of sovereignty and neutralization in Kojéve and Bataille's Hegelian writings, as well as to their critical responses. The essay then turns to examine the reading of Kojéve by the Jesuit Hegelian résistant Gaston Fessard during the war, a reading specifically intended to delegitimate Vichy as a “slave-prince,” resistance to whom would be legitimate. The final section returns to Bataille and his 1948 book The Accursed Share in order to propose that his Maussian understanding of the Marshall Plan suggested an overcoming of the friend/enemy distinction, a suggestion that was later made explicit in a 1957 talk by Kojéve at Düsseldorf before Schmitt and a group of his supporters. At stake throughout are both the thoroughly critical reception of Schmitt, the particular political inflection of Hegel carried out by and in Kojéve's reading, and certain methodological links between conceptual history and the reception history.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)531-560
    Number of pages30
    JournalModern Intellectual History
    Volume8
    Issue number3
    DOIs
    StatePublished - Sep 27 2011

    Fingerprint

    Marshall Plan
    slave
    France
    neutralization
    Jesuit
    history
    sovereignty
    Reception
    Georges Bataille
    Georg W.F. Hegel
    Slaves
    Enemy
    Thought
    Group

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Cultural Studies
    • History
    • Philosophy
    • Sociology and Political Science

    Cite this

    Heterogeneities, slave-princes, and Marshall Plans : Schmitt's reception in Hegel's France. / Geroulanos, Stefanos.

    In: Modern Intellectual History, Vol. 8, No. 3, 27.09.2011, p. 531-560.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{99f92c6adf2c4987a121eae40f18e56f,
    title = "Heterogeneities, slave-princes, and Marshall Plans: Schmitt's reception in Hegel's France",
    abstract = "This essay examines the French reception of the Carl Schmitt's thought, specifically its Hegelian strand. Beginning with the early readings of Schmitt's thought by Alexandre Koj{\'e}ve and Georges Bataille during the mid-1930s, it attends to the partial adoption of Schmitt's friend/enemy distinction and his theories of sovereignty and neutralization in Koj{\'e}ve and Bataille's Hegelian writings, as well as to their critical responses. The essay then turns to examine the reading of Koj{\'e}ve by the Jesuit Hegelian r{\'e}sistant Gaston Fessard during the war, a reading specifically intended to delegitimate Vichy as a “slave-prince,” resistance to whom would be legitimate. The final section returns to Bataille and his 1948 book The Accursed Share in order to propose that his Maussian understanding of the Marshall Plan suggested an overcoming of the friend/enemy distinction, a suggestion that was later made explicit in a 1957 talk by Koj{\'e}ve at D{\"u}sseldorf before Schmitt and a group of his supporters. At stake throughout are both the thoroughly critical reception of Schmitt, the particular political inflection of Hegel carried out by and in Koj{\'e}ve's reading, and certain methodological links between conceptual history and the reception history.",
    author = "Stefanos Geroulanos",
    year = "2011",
    month = "9",
    day = "27",
    doi = "10.1017/S1479244311000345",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "8",
    pages = "531--560",
    journal = "Modern Intellectual History",
    issn = "1479-2443",
    publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
    number = "3",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Heterogeneities, slave-princes, and Marshall Plans

    T2 - Schmitt's reception in Hegel's France

    AU - Geroulanos, Stefanos

    PY - 2011/9/27

    Y1 - 2011/9/27

    N2 - This essay examines the French reception of the Carl Schmitt's thought, specifically its Hegelian strand. Beginning with the early readings of Schmitt's thought by Alexandre Kojéve and Georges Bataille during the mid-1930s, it attends to the partial adoption of Schmitt's friend/enemy distinction and his theories of sovereignty and neutralization in Kojéve and Bataille's Hegelian writings, as well as to their critical responses. The essay then turns to examine the reading of Kojéve by the Jesuit Hegelian résistant Gaston Fessard during the war, a reading specifically intended to delegitimate Vichy as a “slave-prince,” resistance to whom would be legitimate. The final section returns to Bataille and his 1948 book The Accursed Share in order to propose that his Maussian understanding of the Marshall Plan suggested an overcoming of the friend/enemy distinction, a suggestion that was later made explicit in a 1957 talk by Kojéve at Düsseldorf before Schmitt and a group of his supporters. At stake throughout are both the thoroughly critical reception of Schmitt, the particular political inflection of Hegel carried out by and in Kojéve's reading, and certain methodological links between conceptual history and the reception history.

    AB - This essay examines the French reception of the Carl Schmitt's thought, specifically its Hegelian strand. Beginning with the early readings of Schmitt's thought by Alexandre Kojéve and Georges Bataille during the mid-1930s, it attends to the partial adoption of Schmitt's friend/enemy distinction and his theories of sovereignty and neutralization in Kojéve and Bataille's Hegelian writings, as well as to their critical responses. The essay then turns to examine the reading of Kojéve by the Jesuit Hegelian résistant Gaston Fessard during the war, a reading specifically intended to delegitimate Vichy as a “slave-prince,” resistance to whom would be legitimate. The final section returns to Bataille and his 1948 book The Accursed Share in order to propose that his Maussian understanding of the Marshall Plan suggested an overcoming of the friend/enemy distinction, a suggestion that was later made explicit in a 1957 talk by Kojéve at Düsseldorf before Schmitt and a group of his supporters. At stake throughout are both the thoroughly critical reception of Schmitt, the particular political inflection of Hegel carried out by and in Kojéve's reading, and certain methodological links between conceptual history and the reception history.

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85010182300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85010182300&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1017/S1479244311000345

    DO - 10.1017/S1479244311000345

    M3 - Article

    VL - 8

    SP - 531

    EP - 560

    JO - Modern Intellectual History

    JF - Modern Intellectual History

    SN - 1479-2443

    IS - 3

    ER -