Abstract
This article explores various attempts to critique law with reference to an authority or idea that is seen as transcending law in its existing forms. As heuristic tools, I use a distinction between prophetic and apocalyptic discourses, the former referring to discourses that remain sceptical to the possibility of suspending law in any absolute sense; the latter describing discourses that articulate a belief in or commitment to a radical break with the law, envisioning a coming law-free age. To give concreteness to my argument, I focus, in the first part, on the critical interaction between Daniel Bensaïd and Alain Badiou as a typical illustration of the tension between prophetic and apocalyptic discourses. In the subsequent parts, I take the analysis a step further by relating it to various historical discourses on divine law. Drawing on Christine Hayes’ claim that there are overlooked resources in the ancient rabbinic constructions of divine law, I suggest that some of these resources are reactivated – albeit unknowingly – in Bensaïd’s political thinking. Especially in his original conception of revolutionary temporality, Bensaïd provides tools for elaborating a different way of coping with the limits of law, thereby avoiding some of the shortcomings of apocalyptic political theologies.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.