In a strange twist of fate, Joseph de Maistre’s appeal affected Isaiah Berlin. The article focuses on this domain of interest and on its reasons. About this domain, the essay aims to show the Berlinian interpretation of Maistre’s thought through his exploratory and provisional essays; about its reasons, it discloses a meaningful link between counter-Enlightenment and totalitarianism. This link explains his role as an ultra-modern prophet and why 20th-century interpreters show an interest (not only a historical one) in him. His anthropology and his idea of history shed light on totalitarianism: Carl Schmitt calls him to give evidence to his concept of sovereignty, and Isaiah Berlin calls him to elucidate the human passion for self-sacrifice in (totalitarian) society. However, the history of totalitarianism makes understanding Maistre’s thought core difficult. Decisionism (Schmitt) and irrationalism (Berlin) are maybe enough to account for totalitarianism, but they are not enough to account for Maistre’s political theology.
Il saggio si propone di spiegare una ironia del destino dell’opera di Joseph de Maistre: l’interesse di Isaiah Berlin e ricostruisce questo interesse rispetto alle sue occasioni e alle sue ragioni. Rispetto alle occasioni, intende rintracciare nella sfilacciata opera di saggista di Berlin la presenza di Maistre e ricostruirne l’interpretazione complessiva; rispetto alle sue ragioni mette invece a fuoco l’interesse nei confronti del rapporto tra contro-illuminismo e totalitarismo. Infatti, è questo nesso che rende chiaro il ruolo di profeta ultramoderno che viene paradossalmente affidato al controrivoluzionario dagli interpreti novecenteschi. L’antropologia e la visione della storia del conte de Maistre illuminano il fenomeno del totalitarismo: Carl Schmitt lo invoca e ne incorpora la dottrina nella sua definizione della sovranità e Isaiah Berlin lo convoca per spiegare la passione umana per l’auto-sacrificio su cui (non solo) i totalitarismi si reggono. Eppure, la storia dell’ultimo secolo impedisce agli interpreti novecenteschi di comprendere fino in fondo la teologia politica di Maistre, di cui non rendono abbastanza conto le categorie di decisionismo (Schmitt) e irrazionalismo (Berlin).
La profezia di Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821) secondo sir Isaiah Berlin (1909-1997)
Giannetta M.
2022-01-01
Abstract
In a strange twist of fate, Joseph de Maistre’s appeal affected Isaiah Berlin. The article focuses on this domain of interest and on its reasons. About this domain, the essay aims to show the Berlinian interpretation of Maistre’s thought through his exploratory and provisional essays; about its reasons, it discloses a meaningful link between counter-Enlightenment and totalitarianism. This link explains his role as an ultra-modern prophet and why 20th-century interpreters show an interest (not only a historical one) in him. His anthropology and his idea of history shed light on totalitarianism: Carl Schmitt calls him to give evidence to his concept of sovereignty, and Isaiah Berlin calls him to elucidate the human passion for self-sacrifice in (totalitarian) society. However, the history of totalitarianism makes understanding Maistre’s thought core difficult. Decisionism (Schmitt) and irrationalism (Berlin) are maybe enough to account for totalitarianism, but they are not enough to account for Maistre’s political theology.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
