Effective history differs
from traditional history in being without constants. Nothing in
man—not even his body—is sufficiently stable to serve as the
basis for self-recognition or for understanding other men. The
traditional devices for constructing a comprehensive view of history and for retracing the past as a patient and continuous
development must be systematically dismantled. Necessarily, we
must dismiss those tendencies that encourage the consoling play
of recognitions. 
We should aim at
aims at dissolving
the singular event into an ideal continuity—as a teleological
movement
We should not permit ourselves to be transported by a voiceless obstinacy toward
a millenial ending
An event, consequently, is not-a decision, a treaty, a reign, or a’ battle, but the reversal of a relationship of forces, the usurpation of power, the appropriation of a vocabulary turned against those who had once used it, a feeble domination that poisons itself as it grows lax, the entry of a masked “other.”
The forces operating in history are not controlled by destiny or regulative mechanisms, but respond to haphazard? conflicts. They do not manifest the successive forms of a primordial intention and their attraction is not that of a conclusion, for they always appear through the singular randomness
An event, consequently, is not-a decision, a treaty, a reign, or a’ battle, but the reversal of a relationship of forces, the usurpation of power, the appropriation of a vocabulary turned against those who had once used it, a feeble domination that poisons itself as it grows lax, the entry of a masked “other.”
The forces operating in history are not controlled by destiny or regulative mechanisms, but respond to haphazard? conflicts. They do not manifest the successive forms of a primordial intention and their attraction is not that of a conclusion, for they always appear through the singular randomness
No comments:
Post a Comment