States of War

Enlightenment Origins of the Political

Nonfiction, Religion & Spirituality, Philosophy, Political, Social & Cultural Studies, Political Science, Politics, History & Theory
Cover of the book States of War by David Bates, Columbia University Press
View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart
Author: David Bates ISBN: 9780231528665
Publisher: Columbia University Press Publication: November 1, 2011
Imprint: Columbia University Press Language: English
Author: David Bates
ISBN: 9780231528665
Publisher: Columbia University Press
Publication: November 1, 2011
Imprint: Columbia University Press
Language: English

We fear that the growing threat of violent attack has upset the balance between existential concepts of political power, which emphasize security, and traditional notions of constitutional limits meant to protect civil liberties. We worry that constitutional states cannot, during a time of war, terror, and extreme crisis, maintain legality and preserve civil rights and freedoms. David Williams Bates allays these concerns by revisiting the theoretical origins of the modern constitutional state, which, he argues, recognized and made room for tensions among law, war, and the social order.

We traditionally associate the Enlightenment with the taming of absolutist sovereign power through the establishment of a legal state based on the rights of individuals. In his critical rereading, Bates shows instead that Enlightenment thinkers conceived of political autonomy in a systematic, theoretical way. Focusing on the nature of foundational violence, war, and existential crises, eighteenth-century thinkers understood law and constitutional order not as constraints on political power but as the logical implication of that primordial force. Returning to the origin stories that informed the beginnings of political community, Bates reclaims the idea of law, warfare, and the social order as intertwining elements subject to complex historical development. Following an analysis of seminal works by seventeenth-century natural-law theorists, Bates reviews the major canonical thinkers of constitutional theory (Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau) from the perspective of existential security and sovereign power. Countering Carl Schmitt's influential notion of the autonomy of the political, Bates demonstrates that Enlightenment thinkers understood the autonomous political sphere as a space of law protecting individuals according to their political status, not as mere members of a historically contingent social order.

View on Amazon View on AbeBooks View on Kobo View on B.Depository View on eBay View on Walmart

We fear that the growing threat of violent attack has upset the balance between existential concepts of political power, which emphasize security, and traditional notions of constitutional limits meant to protect civil liberties. We worry that constitutional states cannot, during a time of war, terror, and extreme crisis, maintain legality and preserve civil rights and freedoms. David Williams Bates allays these concerns by revisiting the theoretical origins of the modern constitutional state, which, he argues, recognized and made room for tensions among law, war, and the social order.

We traditionally associate the Enlightenment with the taming of absolutist sovereign power through the establishment of a legal state based on the rights of individuals. In his critical rereading, Bates shows instead that Enlightenment thinkers conceived of political autonomy in a systematic, theoretical way. Focusing on the nature of foundational violence, war, and existential crises, eighteenth-century thinkers understood law and constitutional order not as constraints on political power but as the logical implication of that primordial force. Returning to the origin stories that informed the beginnings of political community, Bates reclaims the idea of law, warfare, and the social order as intertwining elements subject to complex historical development. Following an analysis of seminal works by seventeenth-century natural-law theorists, Bates reviews the major canonical thinkers of constitutional theory (Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau) from the perspective of existential security and sovereign power. Countering Carl Schmitt's influential notion of the autonomy of the political, Bates demonstrates that Enlightenment thinkers understood the autonomous political sphere as a space of law protecting individuals according to their political status, not as mere members of a historically contingent social order.

More books from Columbia University Press

Cover of the book Zongmi on Chan by David Bates
Cover of the book Presidential Debates by David Bates
Cover of the book The New Yorker Theater and Other Scenes from a Life at the Movies by David Bates
Cover of the book Spirals by David Bates
Cover of the book The Cinema of Clint Eastwood by David Bates
Cover of the book Modern Korean Drama by David Bates
Cover of the book Deathpower by David Bates
Cover of the book Practicing Religion in the Age of the Media by David Bates
Cover of the book Memory, Trauma, and History by David Bates
Cover of the book The Columbia Guide to Contemporary African American Fiction by David Bates
Cover of the book If You're in a Dogfight, Become a Cat! by David Bates
Cover of the book Audience Evolution by David Bates
Cover of the book The Homoerotics of Orientalism by David Bates
Cover of the book Not Like a Native Speaker by David Bates
Cover of the book Molecular Gastronomy by David Bates
We use our own "cookies" and third party cookies to improve services and to see statistical information. By using this website, you agree to our Privacy Policy