This chapter discusses the conditions surrounding the political as a movement and emphasises the question of the evolutionary process inherent within it. This introduces the teleological dimension that is complementary to its ontological counterpart. Politics is depicted as an evolutionary movement with a still-to-be-determined trajectory, resulting in an ontological change. It is essential to establish criteria for improvement against the alternative risk of involution and/or immobility. This necessitates an understanding of its point of origin and point of tension. Being political and becoming political tend to interwine, often appearing indistinguishable within the political space, as there is always a threshold to cross or a door to pass through. Thus, it is crucial to comprehend which ontology characterises the political being and which parallel evolution is necessary to contemplate the political becoming. Therefore, politics understood as the movement towards the actuation of a never-ending becoming leads one to investigate three elements: (i) the possibility for the political movement to persist or cease; (ii) the reasons for this can/should happen; (iii) and the implications for being. In other words, this chapter investigates the possible relationship and its nature between the origin of politics and its ultimate goal. As has emerged so far, it is an exclusive prerogative of man to come from the countryside to access the political space embodied by the law beyond the door, the polis. Man is thus pushed towards and can make the movement to attempt passing through that door, thereby rendering its being already inherently ‘political’ (in power). However, despite this natural and inescapable drive towards the movement from the countryside to the city, it is not a given that man desires to second this path. The scope of this chapter is thus to investigate this impulse and the implications for the political being and becoming of man. Indeed, the door towards the political is difficult to pass through, and, in a potentially frustrating way, it leads to further doors. Consequently, man must take deliberate action to continue being political. Whether welcomed or not, to enter and persist in politics, man is subject to the obligation to move. This natural law precedes and determines man: ‘The man who is isolated, who is unable to share because he is already self-sufficient, is no part of the city […]. There is therefore a natural impulse in all men towards an association of this sort’ (Aristotle, Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009b [350 BC]: 11). Man cannot evade the obligation imposed by the law of being and remaining in politics. However, it may desire the opposite or be released (ab-solutus) from any (political) relationship. In this regard, based on what emerged in the previous chapters, it is essential to grasp the centrality of the concept of sovereignty. Drawing from Schmitt’s notion of the sovereign decision about the exception—and incorporating interpretations from thinkers like Derrida and Agamben—the political character of this desire warrants investigation. The desire to be unbound by any constraint reflects a desire for absolute sovereignty, not relative or relational. Such a desire alienates man from politics, which fundamentally involves the evolution and movement from an ontology characterised by this (childish) desire to an (adult) desire to dominate such infantilism, thereby striving towards the meeting with the city (relative sovereignty), or the meeting with the other. Politics is inherently evolutionary, as it constantly places man before the ethical dilemma of deciding between the desire to remain in oneself withdrawn from the city or to move towards the other in the city, between being and perceiving oneself as a monad or as a plurality. The decision is political when it promotes the approach to the other; otherwise, it is non-political, thwarting the evolution of man. Man’s political being requires a movement forward, as stagnation results in not being political anymore. This chapter, therefore, lays the groundwork for the discussion on relative and absolute sovereignty, which will become central to the subsequent investigation into the poverty and property of politics.

Two Sovereignties, One Choice: From Schmitt to Decision

章节
发表日期：

2025年

查看全文

Elia R. G. Pusterla,
Francesca Pusterla Piccin

摘要

This chapter discusses the conditions surrounding the political as a movement and emphasises the question of the evolutionary process inherent within it. This introduces the teleological dimension that is complementary to its ontological counterpart. Politics is depicted as an evolutionary movement with a still-to-be-determined trajectory, resulting in an ontological change. It is essential to establish criteria for improvement against the alternative risk of involution and/or immobility. This necessitates an understanding of its point of origin and point of tension. Being political and becoming political tend to interwine, often appearing indistinguishable within the political space, as there is always a threshold to cross or a door to pass through. Thus, it is crucial to comprehend which ontology characterises the political being and which parallel evolution is necessary to contemplate the political becoming. Therefore, politics understood as the movement towards the actuation of a never-ending becoming leads one to investigate three elements: (i) the possibility for the political movement to persist or cease; (ii) the reasons for this can/should happen; (iii) and the implications for being. In other words, this chapter investigates the possible relationship and its nature between the origin of politics and its ultimate goal. As has emerged so far, it is an exclusive prerogative of man to come from the countryside to access the political space embodied by the law beyond the door, the polis. Man is thus pushed towards and can make the movement to attempt passing through that door, thereby rendering its being already inherently ‘political’ (in power). However, despite this natural and inescapable drive towards the movement from the countryside to the city, it is not a given that man desires to second this path. The scope of this chapter is thus to investigate this impulse and the implications for the political being and becoming of man. Indeed, the door towards the political is difficult to pass through, and, in a potentially frustrating way, it leads to further doors. Consequently, man must take deliberate action to continue being political. Whether welcomed or not, to enter and persist in politics, man is subject to the obligation to move. This natural law precedes and determines man: ‘The man who is isolated, who is unable to share because he is already self-sufficient, is no part of the city […]. There is therefore a natural impulse in all men towards an association of this sort’ (Aristotle, Politics, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2009b [350 BC]: 11). Man cannot evade the obligation imposed by the law of being and remaining in politics. However, it may desire the opposite or be released (ab-solutus) from any (political) relationship. In this regard, based on what emerged in the previous chapters, it is essential to grasp the centrality of the concept of sovereignty. Drawing from Schmitt’s notion of the sovereign decision about the exception—and incorporating interpretations from thinkers like Derrida and Agamben—the political character of this desire warrants investigation. The desire to be unbound by any constraint reflects a desire for absolute sovereignty, not relative or relational. Such a desire alienates man from politics, which fundamentally involves the evolution and movement from an ontology characterised by this (childish) desire to an (adult) desire to dominate such infantilism, thereby striving towards the meeting with the city (relative sovereignty), or the meeting with the other. Politics is inherently evolutionary, as it constantly places man before the ethical dilemma of deciding between the desire to remain in oneself withdrawn from the city or to move towards the other in the city, between being and perceiving oneself as a monad or as a plurality. The decision is political when it promotes the approach to the other; otherwise, it is non-political, thwarting the evolution of man. Man’s political being requires a movement forward, as stagnation results in not being political anymore. This chapter, therefore, lays the groundwork for the discussion on relative and absolute sovereignty, which will become central to the subsequent investigation into the poverty and property of politics.