The last chapter of this book contains a rather uncompromising critique of Isaiah Berlin. Even though Sternhell states that he is an ambiguous figure who can be read in different ways, he regards him as an heir to the equally complex Johann Gottfried Herder and to Edmund Burke, and thus as a true Anti-Enlightenment thinker. With his strong critique of many of the core values of the Enlightenment all that's left of his liberalism is what can be called a "blocked" liberalism, i.e. liberalism bereft of many of its main ingredients and in Sternhell's view roughly equivalent of today's neo-conservatism. One could also say that Berlin offered a caricature of the ideas of the Enlightenment as for example its alleged conviction that there is a single perfect goal to be attained by mankind. Susan Neiman has also pointed out that when Berlin stated that the Enlightenment conceived of a single abstract truth and that we therefore can find the right way of to act in every circumstance, he forgot to say which Enlightenment thinker actually held such a dim-witted view (Neiman 2008, p. 177). Outright spine-chilling is Berlin's statement that "Nationalism is an inflamed condition of national consciousness which can be, and has on occasion been, tolerant and peaceful." This was after WWII and here again Berlin neglected to specify when and where an "inflamed condition" could at the same time be "tolerant and peaceful" (Sternhell, p. 413). He embraced Herders organic nationalism - bonds of common descent, language, soil, collective experience - while at the same time managing to place himself within the liberal tradition. According to Sternhell, this is precisely why he has caused so much damage to the heritage of the Enlightenment. In this Anti-Enlightenment line of thought, he also places John Gray as being one of Berlin's "most enthusiastic disciples" .
Throughout the book, Sternhell stresses that the picture is far from black and white. Many of the thinkers on both sides expose a mixed array of ideas. Here a comparison to Jonathan Israel might be instructive - or perhaps complicate matters even more. Whereas Sternhell treats the Enlightenment and Anti-Enlightenment as both being modern, Israel makes a further distinction between radical Enlightenment and moderate Enlightenment. In his recent book, The Revolution of the Mind, Israel places Herder not only within the Enlightenment but in its radical faction (Israel 2010, p. 70). As an example he contrasts Herder's critique of the European colonial empires with Hume's much more conservative stance. Sternhell, on the other hand, emphasizes Voltaire's earlier and more extensive interest in foreign peoples and cultures. He also says that no unprejudiced reading of Herder can accept only one view. In his alas very short foreword to Ernst Cassirer's classic The Philosophy of the Enlightenment, Peter Gay draws our attention to this apparent paradox. Cassirer says that when Herder parts company with his age, his conquest of the Enlightenment is a genuine self-conquest. "Herder's achievement is in fact one of the greatest intellectual triumphs of the philosophy of the Enlightenment" (Cassirer 1932, Princeton University Press 2009, p. 233).
Which ideas belong to which school of thought might thus sometimes be difficult to perceive. Nevertheless there is a distinct pattern to be discerned. For Sternhell there runs a straight line from the Anti-Enlightenment of Herder and Burke over Spengler and Schmitt to Kristol and Himmelfarb. The book also contains lengthy discussions of less familiar names such as Barrès, Renan and Taine. That this philosophical tradition, with its emphasis on antirationalism, relativism and nationalism, bears more responsibility for the horrors of the 20th century than the ideals of humanism, universal values and democracy, is for him beyond doubt. The Anti-enlightenment was not a countermodernity, but constitutes a different modernity in its revolt against rationality, the autonomy of the individual and natural rights. "It was this other modernity that brought about the twentieth century European catastrophe, " Sternhell states in his introduction. These thinkers were revolutionaries of a new kind; Burke was the first representative of Anti-Enlightenment modernity and invented revolutionary conservatism. Together with Herder he mobilized national sentiment and tradition against reason and the autonomy of the individual. "Despite appearances they were neither reactionary nor traditionalist nor conservative" (p. 292). In the first half of the twentieth century, this gave rise to the revolutionary Right and the conservative revolution.
Zeev Sternhell, born in 1935, is Professor Emeritus of Political Sciences at Hebrew University and a leading expert on fascism. If not exactly a page-turner, this book slowly gets you in its grip. Notwithstanding doubts about the translation and generally exhibiting a rather humourless style, it's hard to put down. You cannot argue about the scholarly effort either; the sheer magnitude of Sternhell's erudition is awe-inspiring. The Anti-Enlightenment Tradition is a book to come back to time and again for facts, references as well as for a wealth of ideas - some unquestionably controversial.
無料のKindleアプリをダウンロードして、スマートフォン、タブレット、またはコンピューターで今すぐKindle本を読むことができます。Kindleデバイスは必要ありません。
ウェブ版Kindleなら、お使いのブラウザですぐにお読みいただけます。
携帯電話のカメラを使用する - 以下のコードをスキャンし、Kindleアプリをダウンロードしてください。
何か問題が発生しました。後で再度リクエストしてください。
著者について
著者をフォローして、新作のアップデートや改善されたおすすめを入手してください。
他の国からのトップレビュー
Niklas Anderberg
Shedding light on the Anti-Enlightenment
2010年1月27日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
Jay C. Smith
The second modernity
2010年6月16日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
jmartin
Judge this awful book by its cover
2010年6月9日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
rjanos
Easter Parade: a crypto-fascist Broadway melody or
2011年3月24日にアメリカ合衆国でレビュー済みAmazonで購入
