114
edits
mNo edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 62: | Line 62: | ||
**** 2. Malign sovereignty | **** 2. Malign sovereignty | ||
***** after modern politics the 'ancien regime' seen as a malign sovereignty, 'tyranny of the dark ages' according to enlightened sentiment but paradoxically... REIGN OF TERROR (Robespierre) | ***** after modern politics the 'ancien regime' seen as a malign sovereignty, 'tyranny of the dark ages' according to enlightened sentiment but paradoxically... REIGN OF TERROR (Robespierre) | ||
***** every form of sovereignty that cannot be legitimated by or within modern politics. EXCESS over the complete 'moderniztion' of politics = there is an aspect statehood that continues to exist as an INDIVISIBLE REMAINDER - ** | ***** every form of sovereignty that cannot be legitimated by or within modern politics. EXCESS over the complete 'moderniztion' of politics = there is an aspect statehood that continues to exist as an INDIVISIBLE REMAINDER - **The [[Gangsta Kings]]** resists being domesticated (not the european kings after the renaissance, but Genghis Khan and the 'Oriental' dynasties of gunpowder land empires) (Contemporary examples; Assad, Kim Jong Un, Xi, Putin, Maduro, Chavez, Gaddafi, Khameini, Saddam, Castro, Ortega, Mugabe, Lukashenko, **Robespierre**, _MAGA Trump symbol_ ) | ||
***Robespierre 'resurrects' the 'malign sovereignty' of the 'tyrannical dark ages' - in response to Robespierre - REACTIONISM which has ZERO ORIGINS in the actual ancien regime/feudalism, but in the modern bourgeoisie/modern politics - CYNICS who did not believe in the sacral reality of tradition - the RIGHT WING of modern universal politics - critiqued the French Revolution, but took for granted events like the Glorious Revolution - 'reacting' against the 'malign', they were against a perceived 'excess' that 'perverted' the purity of modern political form - They were not really against constitutionalism, formalism, etc | ***Robespierre 'resurrects' the 'malign sovereignty' of the 'tyrannical dark ages' - in response to Robespierre - REACTIONISM which has ZERO ORIGINS in the actual ancien regime/feudalism, but in the modern bourgeoisie/modern politics - CYNICS who did not believe in the sacral reality of tradition - the RIGHT WING of modern universal politics - critiqued the French Revolution, but took for granted events like the Glorious Revolution - 'reacting' against the 'malign', they were against a perceived 'excess' that 'perverted' the purity of modern political form - They were not really against constitutionalism, formalism, etc | ||
***French Revolution is the ORIGIN OF RIGHT-WING and LEFT-WING aka the POLITICAL SPECTRUM - A SPECTRUM OF MODERN UNIVERSAL STATEHOOD/POLITICS - _Left_ = revolutionary change brought about by the ONE UNIVERSAL STATE - _Right_ = The INTERNAL order of the ONE UNIVERSAL STATE | ***French Revolution is the ORIGIN OF RIGHT-WING and LEFT-WING aka the POLITICAL SPECTRUM - A SPECTRUM OF MODERN UNIVERSAL STATEHOOD/POLITICS - _Left_ = revolutionary change brought about by the ONE UNIVERSAL STATE - _Right_ = The INTERNAL order of the ONE UNIVERSAL STATE |