ABSTRACTAlbert Camus has rarely been considered as a theoretician of democracy. Nonetheless, from the end of the Thirties it is possible to find in his different writings several observations relating to politics and the life of democracy and democracies. The second half of the Forties saw this interest, intertwined with the new post-WWII context, being explicitly dedicated to such subjects in the form of several articles and observations. Through the latter, Camus developed a radical – literally ‘that goes to roots’ (...) – analysis of twentieth century politics, defining an identity between democracy and modesty and using them to face the nihilistic attitude spread by totalitarian regimes and ‘conquering spirits’ within the same western society. Such attention to ‘modesty’ was also defined in direct connection with the idea that Camus developed during the same period on the concept of Art and the role of the artist. According to Camus, the artist – or the ‘eternal girondin’ – is like a democrat who tries to defend pluralism and unity against homologation and totality. Through tracing the historical growth of such a reflection and its relevance in defining some critical issues, this study leads us to a better understanding of contemporary politics and its crisis. (shrink)

Albert Camus has been at the centre of a long and bitter controversy for his positions on the Algerian war. Accused of being a colonialist, marked by Eurocentrism and/or a de facto supporter of imperialism, he in fact joined the struggle for decolonization from his earliest steps in politics, untethering it, however, from any nationalist perspective. This essay delineates the formation of Camusian position on the Algerian crisis, its turning points and the path followed in this regard from the late (...) 1930s to the late 1950s, seeking to reveal his perspective of a decolonial federalism that would simultaneously transform Europe and Africa in order to establish a political community in which there would be neither dominant nor dominated. (shrink)

S'opposant à la clôture hégélienne de la négativité, c'est-à-dire à l'esclavage intériorisé et affirmé par l'homme posthistorique, Bataille définit l'homme en tant que l'être ontologiquement déchiré, constitué par le conflit incontournable pouvant être enlevé non par un moment quelconque de l'histoire, mais uniquement par la mort. Contrairement à la prise de position hégélienne mystifiée l'homme n'est pas, selon Bataille, exclusivement une conscience tout à fait temporalisée, mais aussi un corps et une impulsion ou bien une emanation personifiée de l'énergie cosmique (...) et solaire. En tant que tel il est une négativité par excellence, une tension notoire entre l'interdit et le projet d'une part et la transgression et le dépense anarchique de l'autre, donc un être convulsif orienté non vers la plénitude positivement défini, mais vers la perte. Plus que par les avantages de la culture rejetant la violence et diminuant une existence devenant plus en plus utilisée et fonctionnalisée, l'homme est instigué, selon Bataille, par le sacré qui détermine originairement la dynamique de la vie. Attiré par le sacré en tant que le revers de l'homogénéité de la culture l'homme se dirige vers l'existence tragique souveraine, aspire à l'impossible. Aux système, savoir, possibilités, histoire et vie miasmatique excluant l'extase qui pour la raison n'est rien ou est par elle au moins tout à fait instrumentalisée dans la stratégie de sa ruse, Bataille oppose l'impossible athéologique et asystématique ou bien le non-savoir en tant que régions où se manifeste la souveraineté de l'homme. La souveraineté paradoxale du point de vue des codes pragmatiques, parce que fondée non sur le choix assidu et avare de l'accumulation et de la durée, mais sur le choix excessif de la perte, rudimentaire pour la vie traitée comme une explosion dionysiaque ou solaire. (shrink)

In this paper I wish to comment upon the use of polemical argument in philosophy of education and education. Like Foucault, I believe that a whole morality is at stake because polemical argument obfuscates the search for truth at the expense of truth and the other’s veracity, integrity and dignity. The use of polemics is illustrated by two arguments. The first general argument is taken from an attack upon Albert Camus by the British writer Colin Wilson. The second more particular (...) example is taken from attacks in New Zealand by the State Department of Education upon the educational ideas of the novelist and educator Sylvia Ashton-Warner. Finally I discuss how polemics might be countered in education. (shrink)

The fiftieth anniversary of Camus’ death in 2010 was largely ignored in his native Algeria, reflecting the critical response to Camus’ writings that regards him as a colonialist writer and apologist for the French domination of his native Algeria. This critique also claims that Camus’ colonial attitudes are hidden and reinforced by a European attitude that sees him as dealing first and foremost with universal questions about the human predicament and existential isolation. However, Camus’ journalism shows an Algerian closely identified (...) with the destiny of all the peoples of Algeria, and his novel The Outsider contains sufficient indications that, whatever its existential importance, in the concrete situation of Camus’ Algeria the Arab has the precise status of outsider. (shrink)