Politics of depoliticization: We are by no means safe behind our dike

The real reason for this workshop only came to light at the very end: one participant, the Finnish historian Jussi Kurunmäki, pointed out the paradox that ordinary people are usually more concerned about the politicization of factual issues, while social scientists have been studying processes of " Depoliticization” eye more and more critically.

They distrust the “end of ideologies” that has been proclaimed again and again for more than sixty years and is said to have brought history to a standstill, and instead ask about the political that lies hidden behind practical constraints and the supposed economic lack of alternatives.

But is this really a better way to understand the cause of the observed phenomenon?

Isn't the renunciation of politics too common an occurrence,

"Depoliticization before Neoliberalism" was therefore the logical title of the conference, which brought together two dozen political scientists and historians in Deursen-Dannenburg in the Netherlands, where they wanted to track down the "struggle for the limits of the political sphere since its emergence in the late eighteenth century". .

The dating to the beginning of the saddle period was by no means just for pragmatic reasons, as an interposed question made clear: Aren't there phenomena of depoliticization before the dawn of modernity?

Not in the strict sense, answered the Amsterdam historian Ido de Hahn, who gave the opening lecture.

That something can be made political or apolitical presupposes a distinction that is specifically modern in nature:

the separation of state and society.

Religions, morality in the plural, free discussions and mere private interests can only flourish in an expressly non-state space – only where this space exists can the state and its coercive means be presented as a threat, or vice versa, a state reform of social coexistence be tackled.

If you want to understand the dialectic of politicization and depoliticization historically, you have to ask about the relationship between these two spaces.

a state reform of social coexistence should be tackled.

If you want to understand the dialectic of politicization and depoliticization historically, you have to ask about the relationship between these two spaces.

a state reform of social coexistence should be tackled.

If you want to understand the dialectic of politicization and depoliticization historically, you have to ask about the relationship between these two spaces.

Freedoms for the supporters of the old regime?

The lecture by Mart Rutjes (University of Amsterdam) provided an almost classic example.

His study detailed the many coups and revolutions in the Netherlands, which ultimately led to the expulsion of the governor William V of Orange and the founding of the Batavian Republic in 1795.

Inspired by America and the French Enlightenment, the “patriots” now faced the difficult question of how to preserve the new form of government: could the resentful Orangemen faithful really be granted civil liberties?

An article in the new constitution ordered that "anyone who wished to register as a voter had to submit a signed statement declaring their hatred of the former governor, of federalism, and of the aristocracy."

In individual cities, former supporters of the House of Orange were removed from offices and excluded from the right to vote with the argument of the “revolutionary interim period”.

According to Rutjes, the aim was to depoliticize a part of society that had been meant when the freedom of the human race had previously been proclaimed.