Fascist Historicality. (Alberto Moreiras)

The reference in the blog entry below to “there is no non-somnambulic hero of thought that can claim infrapolitical sovereignty” is a negative reference to #25 (“Historicality and Being) in Heidegger’s Contributions to Philosophy. (Of the Event.).  This paragraph seems to me a very clear and explicit articulation of the notion of inceptual thinking in Heidegger with fascism; henceforth, one of the passages that our project needs to counter.  Notice Heidegger’s thorough biopoliticization of politics, and then the claim of a totally other space for the masters.  And the masters are those who would make it possible for the political process of drastic uprooting for the sake of a new rootedness (a clear reference to the brutality of Nazi power, endorsed) to result in a proper thorough transformation of what he would in other places call “the essence of the human:”

“Historicality here grasped as one truth, the clearing-concealing of being as such.  Inceptual thinking as historical, i.e., as co-grounding history in compliant disposability.”

“Sovereignty over the masses who have become free (i.e., groundless and self-serving) must be erected and sustained with the shackles of ‘organization.’  In this way can what is thereby ‘organized’ grow back in its original ground, so that what is of the masses is not simply controlled but transformed?  Does this possibility have any prospects at all, given the increasing ‘artificiality’ of life, which facilitates and by itself organizes that ‘freedom’ of the masses, that arbitrary accessibility of everything for everyone?  No one, however, should undervalue resistance to the inexorable uprooting, calling a halt to it;  indeed, that is what must happen first. Yet would that guarantee the transformation of the uprootedness into a rootedness, and above all would the means necessary for such an action guarantee this transformation?”

“Still another sovereignty is needed here, one that is concealed and restrained and that for a long time will be sparse and quiet.  Here the future ones must be prepared, those who create in being itself new locations out of which a constancy in the strife of earth and world will eventuate again.”

“Both forms of sovereignty, though fundamentally different, must be willed and simultaneously affirmed by those who know.  Here at the same time is a truth in which the essence of beyng is surmised: in beyng there essentially occurs a fissure into the highest uniqueness and the flattest commonality.”   (I do not know–I do not have the German original–whether the word fissure is Riss.  If so, then it ain’t just a fissure, also a relation of sorts opens up, which would be a fascist one indeed. If it is Zerklüftung, then the question remains as to what Heidegger meant by fissure between “those who know” and the common ones in need of a new rootedness.)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s