Alain Badiou, France’s leading radical theorist and commentator, dissects the Sarkozy phenomenon in this sharp, focused intervention. He argues that the. Alain Badiou (Verso, London, ). ‘[I]f human society is a collection of individuals pursuing their self-interest, if this is the eternal reality, then it is certain that. Philosophers, it is well known, only interpret the world, when the point is to change it. France’s Alain Badiou is a rare exception to this rule – a philosopher who.
|Published (Last):||17 June 2017|
|PDF File Size:||16.18 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||7.27 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. His philosophy seeks to expose and make sense of the potential of radical innovation revolution, invention, transfiguration in every situation.
English Choose a language for shopping. Jan 31, Malcolm rated it really liked it Shelves: So what, for the sake of argument, would our national equivalent be? For one thing, Sarkozy’s image clashed with their notion of how a French president should look and act like. Globalization is the buzzword on all sides… [But] why am I justified in saying that sakozy unified world of human subjects does not exist? But what Badiou stirred up went beyond the concerns and outrage baduou liberals.
Th, the feelings of “tedium vitae” will be more successfully staved-off by someone with a Sarkozy’s image someone with turbulent personal life, extravagant millionaire friends, aristocratic foreign ancestors and a celebrity status. After all, no one in the Labour party is doing the job. The election of Sarkozy had more to do with simple, mundane reasons. The message, says Badiou, was: So just go ahead and begin at page one of this wonderful text, and don’t bother stopping until you’ve arrived, changed, at page On this reading, he does not spurn material goods entirely.
Unless one is willing to analyse the state entirely independently of society, it would seem that a disoriented society should translate into a weak — or at least a disoriented — state. Feb 25, Lena Chilari rated it it was ok.
The Meaning of Sarkozy by Alain Badiou
To understand the significance of Sarkozy, we have to look beyond the right-wing populism and vulgarity of the man himself, and ask what he represents: He is a far cry from the affable politician-postman, Olivier Besancenot, whose recently launched anti-capitalist party is worrying the moderates on the French left.
And he must be strictly against the Anglo-American “Atlantic” world-view. Badiou diagnoses the underlying logic of Sarkozy and traces out the hidden reactionary history of France for which Sarkozy serves as the capstone. Feyzi Ismail 10 May No trivia or quizzes yet.
Want to Read saving…. For all the rhetoric, it would seem that refashioning meaniny institutions and enacting real social change demands the collective force of a mobilised society. Let the ultra-rich newspaper proprietors talk to themselves.
The underlying argument, familiar from any number of Daily Mail editorials, goes as follows: Yet in print he virulently defended himself against his critics.
The Meaning of Sarkozy, by Alain Badiou | Mises Institute
In fact, they can bask in the righteous glow of victimhood, believing themselves besieged by a degenerate, aggressive lower class. In fact, this desire to invest the presidency with so much power is a measure of how difficult it has become to make and implement policy via the mediating institutions of society.
And how did the left respond? The Idea of Communism 2: Nor does Badiou have any sense of Sarkozy’s failings or accomplishments. Badiou has no doubt. Baadiou the discussion thread. On whose terms did it choose? Beginning of the end for BHL Yet in the space of a few years — culminating in his attack on Sarkozy — Badiou has become part of a new subterranean zeitgeist.
Assouline tarred Badiou with the brush of antisemitism: Share your thoughts with other customers. But these weaknesses are minor compared to the strengths.
Read more Read less. Again, if Badiou complains that people lack access to commodities and money, why does he not extol the spread of capitalism, which provides precisely those things?