Apologies of Violence in the 20th Century: The Human and Non-Human

Abstract

The article presents a comparative philosophical-anthropological analysis of the conceptions of emancipatory violence suggested in the 20 th century by such authors as Georges Sorel, Walter Benjamin, Frantz Fanon, and Georges Bataille. It claims that the reason for this comparison is a dialectical structure of double negation, shared by these conceptions, according to which there exist two types of violence. The violence of the first type is committed by those who are in power, e.g. the police, war or state violence, the violence of the strong over the weak, adult over children, men over women, human beings over other animals etc. Such violence is often not recognized as violence, but can be regarded as norm or governmental measures. As a reaction on it, the violence of the second type emerges, i.e. the violence of the oppressed and the excluded, which philosophers describe as a necessary, just, perfect, pure, etc. What is at stake here is not only political antagonisms, but also more general categories, such as nature and reason. A general strike in Sorel, a divine violence in Benjamin, a struggle for liberation in colonies in Fanon, and a sacred violence in Bataille are taken as anthropological models of the violence of a second type (emancipatory). Bataille’s violence, however, falls out of the line: originality of Bataille’s negative anthropological conception is that it focuses on the violence of the non-human, which corresponds to what Bataille calls “general economy” and opposes to restricted economy that leads to wars. Finally, general economy as the violence of the non-human is discussed in relation to Anthropocene and contemporary ecological problems.