Heretical Conversations with Continental Philosophy: Jan Patočka, Central Europe and Global Politics
| Author | Cerwyn Moore |
| Published date | 01 May 2009 |
| Date | 01 May 2009 |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1467-856X.2009.00365.x |
| Subject Matter | Article |
Heretical Conversations with
Continental Philosophy: Jan Patocˇka,
Central Europe and Global Politics
Cerwyn Moore
This article argues that the contributions of the Czech philosopher, Jan Patocˇka, have been
overlooked in the study of International Relations (IR), and more generally international political
theory. Attention here is drawn to the many distinctive ideas particular to Patocˇkian philosophy,
such as the solidarity of the shaken and the care of the soul, which combine accounts of a Central
European philosophy and dissident political reactions to totalitarian rule. The legacy of Patocˇka’s
work frames the latter part of the article, which examines Central European identity and ‘samiz-
dat’ as often neglected reference points in IR. The article concludes by drawing these themes together
in an account of rupture, inspired by the solidarity of the shaken and care for the soul.
Keywords: Patocˇka; solidarity; continental philosophy; dissident literature
Introduction
We have recently passed the 30th anniversary of the death of the Czech philoso-
pher, Jan Patocˇka. Patocˇ ka died at the age of 69 in a Prague hospital, on 13 March
1977. The then Czechoslovakian secret police had interrogated Patocˇka, over a
period of 11 hours, and it is widely believed that his treatment by the authorities
triggered a brain haemorrhage, which ultimately led to his death. In the days
immediately after his arrest in early March, protégés of Patocˇka and a small number
of associates linked to the Czechoslovakian dissident movement made preparations
to transport his written work, samizdat publications, philosophical musings and
political statements out of Eastern Europe.1
Of course Patocˇka, like scores of other anti-Soviet dissidents, had been arrested
many times. However his decision to take an active role as a spokesperson in
Charter 77 placed him in a dangerous position at the forefront of the Czech
dissident movement. The Charter 77 movement was itself a loose and informal
community of dissidents which had emerged following the popular anti-Soviet
uprising in 1968, known as the Prague Spring (Skilling 1981). By the late 1970s the
group had formed a charter, primarily concerned with the protection of civil and
human rights. It drew inspiration from the fact that the Czechoslovak government
had ratified the United Nations Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
and had signed the Helsinki Accords, both legally binding international documents.
In this way, Charter 77 was one of the first organisations in Czechoslovakia to call
for the ‘the laws it had itself promulgated’ (Kohák 1989, 3). Indeed both the
The British Journal of
Politics and International Relations
doi: 10.1111/j.1467-856x.2009.00365.x BJPIR: 2009 VOL 11, 315–331
© 2009 The Author.Journal compilation © 2009 Political Studies Association
activities of Charter 77 and the role of specific writers such as Patocˇka are signifi-
cant, in so far as they raise questions about dissent and dissidence, and continental
philosophy in IR.2
Nonetheless, it is fair to say that Patocˇka’s work has been largely neglected even in
philosophical circles, apart of course from a small coterie of devoted experts based
outside what was formerly known as Czechoslovakia. These experts continue to
draw his work into mainstream theoretical debates concerned, for the most part,
with the tension between ethics and politics (Skilling 1981; Shanks 1995; Lom
1999; Findlay 2002; Tucker 2000). Others, formerly or currently based within the
Czech Republic, such as Erazim Kohák, Ivan Chvatik or Martin Palouš, have spent
many years refining their own philosophical work, drawing explicitly on the legacy
of Patocˇka (Kohák 1989; Palouš 1990; Chvatik 1992). Moreover, some Patocˇ kian
ideas have been touched upon in recent work on philosophy and political theory,
particularly evident in the exegeses of Richard Rorty, Jacques Derrida and Paul
Ricoeur (Rorty 1991; Derrida 1996; Ricoeur 1996).3Significantly though, at around
the same time as the disintegration of the Soviet control over parts of Central and
Eastern Europe, a concerted effort was made to integrate Patocˇka’s philosophical
ideas into the domestic politics of Czechoslovakia, and thereafter in the Czech
Republic. In particular, this occurred as a result of Václav Havel (1991, 1992 and
1994) whose work, in a general sense, I will draw upon throughout the article.
The argument that follows seeks to draw on Patocˇka’s work, to meld some of his
ideas into IR theory and, in so doing, to develop analysis of global politics as part of
a broader conversation with continental philosophy.4It does so by presenting an
exploratory account of a Central European philosophical movement between
Husserl and Heidegger, embodied in Patocˇkian philosophy (Patocˇ ka 1996a and
1998). However, the article will also argue that themes identified in the late essays
of Patocˇka can be used to develop a bridge between accounts of global politics
informed by continental philosophy, and readings of rupture and care.5To some
extent these two themes run through the article, addressed as they are in Milan
Kundera’s account of Central European identity and Havel’s reading of political
responsibility captured in the phrase life ‘lived in truth’. Lastly, I examine the
implications of these themes through an account of rupture, as a further contribu-
tion to studies of global politics.
A final point of clarification is necessary in order to situate the arguments in the
article: the analysis should not be read as a detailed interrogation of Patocˇka’s
oeuvre, or for that matter Kundera or Havel’s readings of politics, philosophy or
Czech identity. Nor does it seek to examine in detail the imperfections in Patocˇka’s
reading of Czech history, a point raised by Aviezer Tucker (1996). Instead, the
article seeks to develop a conversation with threads of Patocˇka’s work, to weave
ideas of care and rupture into IR theory and inform debate about the inter-relations
between these themes. More generally though, the intervention associated with
Patocˇka points towards a set of unanswered questions that frame the article as a
whole; what can we learn from the work of Patocˇka, especially when we consider
the implications of his ideas such as solidarity of the shaken and care for the soul,
and can these themes be employed to inform, and enhance even, debate within
contemporary International Relations theory?
316 CERWYN MOORE
© 2009 The Author.Journal compilation © 2009 Political Studies Association
BJPIR, 2009, 11(2)
To continue reading
Request your trial