hrcak mascot   Srce   HID



Paul Ricoeur

Puni tekst: hrvatski, pdf (133 KB) str. 184-205 preuzimanja: 727* citiraj
APA 6th Edition
Ricoeur, P. (2012). Politički paradoks. Politička misao, 49 (1), 184-205. Preuzeto s
MLA 8th Edition
Ricoeur, Paul. "Politički paradoks." Politička misao, vol. 49, br. 1, 2012, str. 184-205. Citirano 25.10.2020.
Chicago 17th Edition
Ricoeur, Paul. "Politički paradoks." Politička misao 49, br. 1 (2012): 184-205.
Ricoeur, P. (2012). 'Politički paradoks', Politička misao, 49(1), str. 184-205. Preuzeto s: (Datum pristupa: 25.10.2020.)
Ricoeur P. Politički paradoks. Politička misao [Internet]. 2012 [pristupljeno 25.10.2020.];49(1):184-205. Dostupno na:
P. Ricoeur, "Politički paradoks", Politička misao, vol.49, br. 1, str. 184-205, 2012. [Online]. Dostupno na: [Citirano: 25.10.2020.]

The author used the 1956 Hungarian anti-Stalinist rebellion as the starting
point for a thorough rethinking of the political structures of man’s existence,
in particular of political power. Such a rethinking is based on the insight regarding
the autonomy of the political with regard to the economic and class
structure of society. From this is derived not only the specific rationality of
state and politics, but also the specific political evils related to the very nature
of political power. Specific rationality, specific evil – therein lies the double
and paradoxical originality of the political. It is the task of political philosophy
to make this originality explicit and to clarify its paradox: the greatest
political evil is linked with the greatest political rationality, and political
alienation exists precisely because the political is relatively autonomous. The
autonomy of the political is not only the idea of man’s stepping into man-hood
through citizen-hood, but also the distinctive character of the political connection
in relation to the economic connection. The understanding and criticism
of the political paradox can be approached only if one sets clear boundaries
to the political sphere and perceives the validity of the distinction between
the political and the economic. Every criticism presupposes this distinction,
and it does not abolish it in any respect. In order to rediscover the sense of the
political, one must return to Rousseau’s reflection in continuation of a return
to the thinkers of classical antiquity (Aristotle’s Politics in particular) as basis
for any criticism of power. The truth of the political, as the reality of state
ideality, is the legal equality of all before all, irreducible to class conflicts, to
the dynamics of economic supremacy and alienation. But the state is also –
will, administration and physical coercion. Thus the political as a reasonable
organisation implies politics as decision: the political is always accompanied
by politics. Unlike the political, which exists only in great moments, in “crises”,
at “turning points”, at crossroads of history, politics is perceived as a set
of actions aimed at winning, executing and retaining power. Precisely politics
poses the problem of political evil. This however does not mean that power
is identical to evil. But power is particularly prone to evil; throughout history
it has been perhaps the greatest opportunity for evil and the greatest demonstration
of evil. The reason for this is that power is a momentuous thing, that
power is the instrument of historical rationality of the state. This is the fundamental
political paradox. A practical solution to this paradox – to achieve that
there is a state, but that there is not too much of it – is possible only through
democratic control of the people over the state and through invention of institutional
techniques the purpose of which is to make possible the exercise of
power and to make impossible any abuse thereof.

Ključne riječi
the political; politics; State; power; political rationality; political evil; Plato; Aristotle; Machiavelli; Rousseau; Hegel; Marx

Hrčak ID: 81932



Posjeta: 1.650 *