Abbiamo rivolto una serie di domande ad Angela de Benedictis e a Raffaele Laudani, autori di due volume che mettono in primo piano il rapporto tra obbedienza e disobbedienza. Il confronto riguarda una serie di concetti politici fondamentali all'interno della storia costituzionale moderna: resistenza, ribellione, rivoluzione, potere costituente, sovranità. Fondamentali risultano i linguaggi con i quali trovano espressione le contestazioni dell'ordine, in particolare il linguaggio giuridico che è spesso usato sia per contestare l'ordine sia per confermarlo. Non da ultimo (...) emerge l'importanza che la disobbedienza ha avuto per costituire lo spazio politico europeo e atlantico. (shrink)

Perché la filosofia moderna (post-medioevale) si è progressivamente allontanata dal realismo, dalla tradizionale idea di verità come conformità (_adaequatio_) alla realtà. Vi è sia una (sofferta) reazione agli eccessi dogmatici (e potenzialmente intolleranti) del tipo di realismo medioevale, sia una volontà di sottrarsi, sottraendosi all'oggettività del finito, alla dipendenza da Dio, Oggettività suprema.

In Mexico, as in the case of the massacre of 1968 in Tlatelolco, there exists a long tradition of writing history in a tragic or traumatic key by starting from its founding moments of violence, as if the repetitive compulsion could be met only by the compulsion to repeat the trauma. And yet, this essay proposes that perhaps we should not forget that the compulsion to respond to the violence of repression with a sorrow song or a memorial of grievances (...) ends up being very much part and parcel of the effect of displaying the spectacle of sovereign power that was being sought after in the first place. Precisely because it is so terribly awe-inspiring, state violence when it is wielded serves not just as a symptom of vulnerability but also as a way of diverting attention away from the utopian dreams and efforts in resistance and self-government that were unfolding on the ground prior to the punctual onslaught of repression. Drawing important lessons from the experience of the disappeared students of Ayotzinapa, the point is not to let ourselves be blinded by the power of repression but to let ourselves be illuminated by the resistance that comes before it. (shrink)

The interview to Ranabir Samaddar – translated from the original in Bengali by V. Ramaswamy – deals with the Naxalite decade in the perspective of the history it grew from, the history it was part of, and the history it created. The underlying question is: has this decade inaugurated a new phase in the Indian history of rebellions? Samata Biswas and Sandip Bandopadhyay, speaking on behalf of the Calcutta Research Group, engage in a deep dialogue on the novelties and the (...) legacy of the “dangerous decade” that the rulers have only wanted to put to death. The interview explores the evolving modes of popular politics of the past as well, shedding light on the unprecedented and stark opposition between activism and pacifism including submission to law and order. The answers are as much historical as political. (shrink)