Hannah Arendt: Jew and Cosmopolitan

Cet article traite de la différence entre universalisme et cosmopolitisme. Ce qui rend le cosmopolitisme singulier est qu’il est toujours enraciné dans une identité donnée, qu’il prend en compte son particularisme et tente toujours de tolérer les autres identités. L’universalisme, lui, est fondé sur l’illusion qu’il peut dépasser les identités particulières – il essaie, en fait, d’imposer une identité unique à tout le monde. Cet article vise à ramener l’expérience juive particulière d’Arendt dans l’équation de ses horizons universels et, de cette manière, à montrer comment elle naviguait constamment entre l’universalisme et le particularisme par sa compréhension du jugement politique, de la tradition révolutionnaire, du républicanisme fédéral et d’autres questions qu’elle a examinées à travers le prisme du destin juif.This paper deals with the difference between universalism and cosmo-politanism. If I understand correctly, what makes cosmopolitanism distinctive is that it is always rooted in a specific identity which realizes that it is specific, and always endeavours to tolerate all other identities. Universalism on the other hand is based on the illusion that it can transcend specific identities—and in fact endeavours to impose a single identity on everyone. The focus of this paper is to set Arendt’s specifically Jewish experience back in the context of her universal horizons, and in doing so to show how she constantly navigated between universalism and particularism through her understanding of political judgment, the revolutionary tradition, federal republicanism, and other issues which she examined through the prism of Jewish destiny

Memory and Forgetting in the Post-Holocaust Era. The Ethics of Never Again

To forget after Auschwitz is considered barbaric. Baer and Sznaider question this assumption not only in regard to the Holocaust but to other political crimes as well. The duties of memory surrounding the Holocaust have spread around the globe and interacted with other narratives of victimization that demand equal treatment. Are there crimes that must be forgotten and others that should be remembered? In this book the authors examine the effects of a globalized Holocaust culture on the ways in which individuals and groups understand the moral and political significance of their respective histories of extreme political violence. Do such transnational memories facilitate or hamper the task of coming to terms with and overcoming divisive pasts? Taking Argentina, Spain and a number of sites in post-communist Europe as test cases, this book illustrates the transformation from a nationally oriented ethics to a trans-national one. The authors look at media, scholarly discourse, NGOs dealing with human rights and memory, museums and memorial sites, and examine how a new generation of memory activists revisits the past to construct a new future. Baer and Sznaider follow these attempts to manoeuvre between the duties of remembrance and the benefits of forgetting. This, the authors argue, is the "ethics of Never Again."Peer reviewe

Antigone in León: The drama of trauma politics

Peer reviewe