Search

Raymond Aron is well-known for a number of ideas but one of his most cherished has largely gone unnoticed. This is his concept of liberty. While he did not dedicate a particular volume or write many essays on this theme, it was one of his most important legacies to modern political thought. He was an ardent defender of the notion of liberty and his conviction regarding its importance is found in a series of lectures that he gave in California and later in his final lecture in France. This essay is intended to highlight Aron's notion of liberty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The document examines the role of Raymond Aron in democratic socialization, highlighting his rediscovery of Tocquevillian thought and his analysis of modernity. Aron, although he did not write major works on education, contributed to the reflection on democratic education. His stance on May 68 shows his reformist vision and concern for the fragility of modern societies. His approach, inspired by Tocqueville, emphasizes tolerance and responsibility as key values of democracy. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Universum is the property of Instituto de Estudios Humanisticos Juan Ignacio Molina, Universidad de Talca and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Raymond Aron was one of the Western intellectuals who stood up for the revolution after the 1956 Hungarian Revolution. In fact, he was one of the French intellectuals who, even during the Cold War, were clearly anti-communist and critical of the Soviet totalitarian dictatorship. This clarity of his political vision was the “virtue” of a political thinker who considered it essential to base his thinking always on a sound analysis of the political situation. In reconstructing this way of thought, the paper identifies three paradigms of beliefs about the nature of politics: one associated with Machiavelli and Schmitt, a moralising Kantian position, and a middle ground between the two paradigms, which can be traced back to Aristotle. Drawing on a late lecture by Aron, the paper shows that, according to the French thinker, practical reason can guide us in dealing with things subject to changing circumstances, and politics is of this nature. In this context, practical reason is identified by him as practical wisdom, what Aristotle called phronesis and the Romans identified as the virtue of prudence. In this interpretation of Aron, the paper follows Pierre Manent. In the final part of the thesis, Aron’s analysis of the nature of “the political” is applied to two episodes in Hungarian history, the reign of Gabriel Bethlen in Transylvania and the circumstances of the birth of the Settlement with Austria. This is to show how Aron’s political thought might be used to provide the methodological framework to interpret notions of “the political” in modern Hungarian political thought, the aim of the research K 143251 at RIPG, UPS, funded by the National Scientific Research Fund. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In every era, under every regime or social authority, political realism provides insightful teachings or warnings on human illusions and the contradictions of historical enterprises. Some of its best tenants, in particular within the tradition of Italian political theory, perform such an intellectual task by highlighting what they call the “regularities of politics”. However, from this perspective, and to the extent that it remains faithful to its method, realism does not necessarily shape the most fitting attitude when the thinker, like the agent, has to explain and judge the “fundamental alternatives” which define the motives of politics and the wellspring of history. Its outlook risks then abolishing the practical meaning of human phenomenon. It risks seeing all historical events as a “system of ashes” (Péguy) or to lose sight of the “whole reality” (Aron), including its human meaning. Such a risk does not necessarily depend, so to speak, on the realist’s personal and political beliefs. It could be at work in some of the realist’s primary presuppositions on human action: his method tends to beg the primary questions which unify human history, the effective experiences he has every day under his eyes. On the basis of those presuppositions, in any case, the realist risks finding in his “questionable” premises the “conclusions” of his research: it tends to find the explanation of what is “regular” in human life in what denies the properly human, sometimes in the beast, almost never in God. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

If the specificity of liberal democracy, as a regime, is to base power on consent then political violence appears to contradict the typical self-understanding of the societies whose functioning it informs. A justification of the motives which may call for such violence thus becomes both a political and a philosophical problem when such a regime faces the necessity to resort to violent means of action. Reaching intellectual maturity during the 30's and the 40's, while democratic states were faltering in Europe, Raymond Aron had an acute understanding of this issue. An inquiry into Aron's publications from that period will help us identify what kind of moral and cultural foundations they need to have if they are not to collapse during wartime. These texts also shed an original light on his post-war political thought and may lead us to reconsider some dominant contemporary interpretations of his work as revolving around the Kantian–Machiavellian antinomy. When compared to either element of this antinomy, Aron's conception of agency, its emphasis on moral obligations, virtues and moral character, starts bearing more resemblance to the political science of Aristotle than to modern social or political science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article examines the history of the French press that was based in London during the Second World War, focusing on its contribution to political debates of and about French exile, its relationship to the British government and its role in shaping inter-Allied relations. The article begins by outlining the development of British policy towards the foreign press based in London before examining three publications: the left-leaning daily France, the Gaullist weekly La Marseillaise and the monthly cultural and political periodical La France libre. By drawing on the contents of these papers alongside a variety of French, British and American archival material, the article shows that while the French press in London had a limited readership, it exercised significant influence among political elites either side of the Atlantic during the war and helped shape the terms of French debates over the meaning of Gaullism well into the post-Second World War period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Cultura Económica is the property of Pontificia Universidad Catolica Argentina and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

A timeless critique holds that the radical is animated by a deep sense of certainty that leads to the worst excesses. By distinguishing essentialist and non-essentialist forms of radicalism, Ernesto Laclau offers a "coalitional" form of radicalism that, in effect, responds to this critique. Laclau deconstructs classical forms of radicalism, such as Marxism, to show how one can use some of their formal components, such as dichotomic rhetoric and a notion of utopia, without assuming that their particular content (e.g., the figure of the proletarian or the socialist utopia) entails the permanent abolition of oppression. Laclau's radicalism enables political actors to build their own radical front by politicizing and creating linkages between issues. Laclau thus avoids the epistemic certainty of classical radicalisms. However, in the interest of politically effective radicalism, he deploys a localized form of certainty that has an ambivalent potential for intolerance and violence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article aims to describe the way in which Raymond Aron received and interpreted Max Weber's intellectual work. This reception can be divided in two periods. The first period is marked by discovery: Aron meets Weber in the 1930s and is very well impressed by his methodological rigor and his way of understanding political reality. Then, from the 1950s onwards, Aron distances himself somewhat from some of Weber's central theses. Particularly, he does not believe that a scientist, as such, is able to reach something akin to neutrality. This distancing, however, did not prevent him from recognizing in Weber's work a rather solid contribution to social sciences, nor did it prevent him from accepting many of his teachings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Classical Realism represents a science of politics that is distinct from the conventional understanding of science in International Relations. The object of Realist science is the art of politics, which is the development of a sensibility based on practical knowledge to balance values and interests and to make judgments. Realism's science and its object led to its tagging as "wisdom literature." This article illustrates that reading Hans Morgenthau's and Raymond Aron's work shows how their hermeneutic form of enquiry provides insights into the character of international politics, which conventional understandings do not. Following the example of Morgenthau, the article, first, illustrates how Realism, rather than providing a theory of practice, builds on a science with the purpose to judge knowledge. Realism's science analyzes the objective conditions of politics, theorizes them, and takes into account the requirements of political practice under contingencies and considerations of morality. The article, second, examines Aron's take on political practice in the context of the Cold War and politics that built on knowledge without experience to judge knowledge. Morgenthau and Aron's science helps to capture Realism's take on politics as an art, how to explicate Realism's epistemological foundation and value in studying international politics. Doing so, the article, third, contributes to practice theory by clarifying several aspects of Realism's science. In particular, it shows how Realism captures the art of politics by conceptualizing practice as a form of human conduct thereby offering a more coherent notion of practice than current practice theory. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Este artigo destaca duas leituras influenciadas pelo texto Politik, do historiador Alemão Heinrich von Treitschke (1834-1896). A primeira é encontrada na publicação “L’Allemagne au-dessus de tout: la mentalité allemande et la guerre”, da autoria de Émile Durkheim (1858-1917) em 1915. Já a segunda leitura aparece no livro Paix et Guerre Entre les Nations, assinado por Raymond Aron (1905-1983) em 1962. O artigo se volta para os principais pontos de Treitschke, destacados nas abordagens de Durkheim e Aron, e tem como objetivo analisar em que medida as diferenças das visões durkheimianas e aronianas respondem satisfatoriamente à perspectiva de Treitschke. Como leitores peculiares, Durkheim e o Aron da Guerra Fria oferecem duas chaves importantes, uma vez que o poder político, suas configurações e possibilidades, também emergem como pontos de discussão bibliográfica e reflexões sobre os riscos, acertos e imposturas intelectuais, diante da diplomacia, relações internacionais e sociologia.

Jeremy Waldron has argued that Berlin ignored the importance of institutions and constitutions and worked with an impoverished conception of social and political design. Political structures, legal and political institutions, constitutional design, mechanisms of representation and the rule of law: all this remained untouched by Berlin, who seemed, in Waldron's opinion, largely uninterested in the actual political institutions of liberal society. In this essay, I argue that what may be missing in Berlin—close and sustained attention to, and interest in, institutions and social context—can be found in the works of his prominent contemporary, Raymond Aron (1905-1983), who also wrote about liberty during the Cold War. As such, Aron's An Essay on Liberty can and should be read as a complement to Berlin's essay "Two Concepts of Liberty." [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract not available.

El propósito de este artículo, que integrará el Vol. I Nº1 de la Revista Chilena de Relaciones Internacionales y a quienes agradezco por haberme integrado a su Comité Científico, pretende ser un reconocimiento a los aportes de Raymond Aron a los estudios de Relaciones Internacionales. La intención es reflexionar sobre algunos de los conceptos y categorías de análisis por él propuestos que, a mi criterio, permiten no sólo considerarlo un “adelantando” o un teórico “de vanguardia” para su época sino un intelectual vigente aún hoy ya que con su impronta sociológico-histórica apostó a la comprensión de la “complejidad” de la sociedad internacional.

Raymond Aron publicó en 1962 el voluminoso libro Paz y guerra entre las naciones. Realiza en él un reconocido aporte para las teorí­as de las relaciones internacionales. Transita el ví­nculo entre polí­tica y guerra, en la perspectiva de esbozar un marco conceptual para comprender las relaciones interestatales y presentar algunas proyecciones polí­ticas “racionales” para un mundo signado por las armas nucleares en el marco de Guerra Frí­a. En un itinerario polí­tico e intelectual que recorre el liberalismo y el anticomunismo, Aron ofrece un trabajo sobre el que, si bien fue concebido para un mundo bipolar, siempre es pertinente preguntarse sobre su vigencia, pues si bien ya no vemos bipolaridad, hay más paí­ses con armas nucleares en un mundo plagado de tensiones.

Este artí­culo tiene por objeto el análisis sociológico de Raymond Aron sobre las relaciones entre polí­tica, diplomacia y estrategia. Me enfocaré en las comprensión de Aron acerca de: 1) la diplomacia y la estrategia como vectores de la polí­tica externa de los Estados; 2) las tensiones en la guerra entre el conductor polí­tico y el conductor de las operaciones militares; 3) las formas de la guerra contemporánea: “guerra convencional”, “guerra nuclear” y otras formas de la “guerra no convencional”. Por último reflexionaré sobre la importancia de la obra de Aron para académicos, polí­ticos y militares en la Argentina actual.

Este artí­culo es una introducción a la biografí­a intelectual de Raymond Aron como intérprete del siglo XX; refiere a algunas de sus influyentes producciones cientí­ficas e intervenciones en polí­tica y periodismo; y presenta el contenido de este dossier centrado en la obra de este notable sociólogo francés, infrecuentemente enseñado en las universidades y cuyo legado ha sido escasamente valorizado en investigaciones en ciencias sociales en Argentina.

May 68 has been characterized and interpreted in many ways. In this paper I provide an account of three characterizations among the most important: a political crisis; a psycho-drama and a carnival; and a crisis of civilization. I also provide the reasons making me thinking that Raymond Aron is right in most of his contentions about what happened 50 years ago. I also explain the reasons why the May 68 legacy would impossible to claim. However, I contend that the anti-hierarchical criticism by the Parisian students must be taken more seriously. To do so, I make some reflections on the arguments by neuroscientist Henri Laborit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cuestiones de Sociologia: Revista de Estudios Sociales is the property of Universidad Nacional de La Plata and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cuestiones de Sociologia: Revista de Estudios Sociales is the property of Universidad Nacional de La Plata and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cuestiones de Sociologia: Revista de Estudios Sociales is the property of Universidad Nacional de La Plata and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revue Historique (0035-3264) is the property of Presses Universitaires de France and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The Western international law of territory starts from a standpoint of the priority of the State over its population. The latter is merely an object of the ownership of the State. Title to territory rests on dominant evidence of State activity. The activity of so-called private individuals or economic activity of peoples do not count towards title to territory in the case law of international tribunals. This article contests the foundations of such a perspective. The so-called Western law of territory was devised by Western States to divide up among themselves the territory of non-Western 'non-peoples', culminating in the racist Island of Palmas Arbitration. Carl Schmitt provides the makings of an alternative history of the law of territory. It is, and should be, the law of the homelands of peoples, historically located on particular spaces. Peoples precede States, which are merely institutions used by Peoples to protect and administer their homelands. Whatever the difficulties of locating the homelands to which Peoples belong, escape into the so-called Western law of territory as a way to 'Peace through the Rule of Law' is an illusion – described contemptuously by the political theorist Raymond Aron as a Law of empty spaces. Without justice, there is no law. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We argue that contemporary relativism about truth should not be confused with classical skepticism. Using texts of Isaiah Berlin, Raymond Aron and Leo Strauss, we attempt to show that contemporary relativism is a recent phenomenon and that it rests on much stronger hypothetical claims than mere skepticism. The appeal of both positions stems from their apparent opposition to the dogmatisms of the past, but relativism can (and in our opinion, should) be refuted without calling for a contradiction of terms. We suggest that its assumptions are in fact much weaker than is currently believed, and that we should be disturbed by some of his most extreme consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Conservative Thought / Muhafazakar Düşünce is the property of Muhafazakar Dusunce Dergisi and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Well into the 1940s, many French biologists rejected both Mendelian genetics and Darwinism in favour of neo-transformism, the claim that evolution proceeds by the inheritance of acquired characteristics. In 1931 the zoologist Maurice Caullery published Le Problème d’évolution, arguing that, while Lamarckian mechanisms could not be demonstrated in the present, they had nevertheless operated in the past. It was in this context that Raymond Aron expressed anxiety about the relationship between biology, history, and human autonomy in his 1938 Introduction à la philosophie de l’histoire: essai sur les limites de l’objectivité historique, in which he rejected both neo-Kantian and biological accounts of human history. Aron aspired to a philosophy of history that could explain the dual nature of human existence as fundamentally rooted in the biological, and at the same time, as a radical transcendence of natural law. I argue that Aron’s encounter with evolutionary theory at this moment of epistemic crisis in evolutionary theory was crucial to the formation of his philosophy of history, and moreover that this case study demonstrates the importance of moving beyond the methodological divisions between intellectual history and history of science. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presented article puts mind to the thinking of Raymond Aron (1905–1983). Author is focused on Aron's complexive method by joining sociology, history or philosophy of history for describing international relations in four decades of Cold War how it developped from 40's to 80's of 20th century. Aron's analyses are calling by himself as "history of presence". He described international political strategy from realistic theory of international relations. Aron studied the principles of cold war, relations between USA and USSR, nuclear armament, balance of power in bi-polar international relations, power strategic analysis and belligerent peace. He analysed international relations when the world-powers don't attack straightly and prefer conflicts in regions (sub-systems).

The critical analysis of Communism as a new regime which appeared in 1917 has been a difficult task in the context of the first half of the 20th century, especially after the alliance against Nazism during the Second War. However, the great French political thinker Raymond Aron structured his scientific and polemical arguments as soon as the thirties and until his death in 1983. His thought stood at the interface of reading Marx and watching at political events. That's why he displayed his reflection on three grounds: the ideology as a destructor of objectivity, the totalitarian regime as a political monopolistic structure ruining the society, and the foreign policy of the Soviet imperialism, which requires both an acute comprehension and a prudent but determined fight. These were in his view the conditions for the safeguard of freedom of spirit against totalitarian domination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Yearbook of the Faculty of Political Sciences / Godisnjak Fakultet Politickih Nauka Beograd is the property of University of Belgrade, Faculty of Political Sciences and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista de Estudios Políticos is the property of Centro de Estudios Politicos y Constitucionales and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)