Des passions et de la compétence politique

Abstract

It is possible to find any consistency in Spinoza's heterogeneous argument leading to the abrupt conclusion (last page of his interrupted « Tractatus politicus ») that « women cannot rule ». A detour through Spinoza's « Ethics » where it is shown that Passions (here Jealousy) tend to interfere with the requirements implied by social agreement, is needed in order to understand the logic underlying Spinoza's argument. While, according to Real-Politik, it is impossible to hold absolute command over passions. It is clear that women are the cause of dissension between men, since they are objects of a contrary desire to social agreement and impossible to share. Thus the reason why women are not suited for government is not some intrinsic inability ; it is rather due to some indirect consequence : since neither desire nor objects of desire can be suppressed, the only way out is to make these objects harmless. Conjugal appropriation is the way found to abolish the real danger inherent to a « free thing ». Once a woman is « in the power of her husband », she does not fulfil the logical and legal conditions required by citizenship. Quod erat demonstrandum. Women are thus expelled out of the political field where they would otherwise be cause of desire, therefore of discord.