2004
Volume 112, Issue 2
  • ISSN: 0002-5275
  • E-ISSN: 2352-1244

Abstract

Abstract

The concept of oikophobia is often used as an answer and rebuttal to the accusation of xenophobia that is often raised against nationalist groups. Oikophobia denounces the image of nationalists as people who first and foremost hate what is foreign or the foreigner. They describe themselves, on the contrary, as having a strong attachment to their own culture and their opponents as having a fear of or aversion to their origin or (cultural) home. This game of asymmetrical descriptions is the subject of this contribution, which focuses on the logic of distinctions that lies behind this resistance to (hostile) images. What then also lights up is that the global polarization we see between nationalist and cosmopolitan movements also concerns the status of asymmetrical distinctions themselves. The nationalist resistance to world society can be interpreted as a resistance to the becoming symmetrical of existential distinctions, i.e. distinctions that create identity and belonging.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW2020.2.003.TERP
2020-07-01
2022-05-16
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Appiah, K.A.(2018)The Lies that Bind. Rethinking Identity. London: Profile Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baudet, Th.(2019)Oikofobie. De angst voor het eigene. Amsterdam: Prometheus, 2019 (negende druk; eerste druk 2013).
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Baudet, Th.(2020)Roger Scruton, mijn leermeester, op zoek naar het verloren huis, in: NRC Handelsblad, 14 januari 2020, p. 18 (Opinie).
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Böckelmann, F.(2007)Die Welt als Ort. Erkundungen im entgrenzten Dasein, Wien/Leipzig/Berlin: Karolinger/Alpheus.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Böckelmann, F.(2014)Jargon der Weltoffenheit. Was sind unsere Werte noch wert?. Lüdinghausen/Berlin: Edition Sonderwege.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Heidegger, M.(1991)Over denken, bouwen, wonen. Vier essays. Nijmegen: SUN, pp. 46-65.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Junge, K., K.Postoutenko (red.) (2011)Asymmetrical Concepts after Reinhart Koselleck. Historical Semantics and Beyond. Bielefeld: transcript.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Jünger, E.(1980)Der Weltstaat. Organismus und Organisation, in: Sämtliche Werke. Band 7. Zweite Abteilung. Essays I. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Kondylis, P.(1984)Macht und Entscheidung. Die Herausbildung der Weltbilder und die Wertfrage. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Kondylis, P.(1986)Konservativismus. Geschichtlicher Gehalt und Untergang. Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Kondylis, P.(1991)Der Niedergang der bürgerlichen Denk- und Lebensform. Die liberale Moderne und die massendemokratische Postmoderne. Weinheim: VCH/Acta humaniora.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Koschorke, A.(2011)Wie Bürgerkriege erzählt werden. Feldtheoretische Überlegungen zur Konfliktsemantik, in: S.Ferhadbegović, B.Weiffen (red.) Bürgerkriege erzählen. Zum Verlauf unziviler Konflikte. Paderborn: Konstanz University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Koselleck, R. (1989a) Zur historisch-politischen Semantik asymmetrischer Gegenbegriffe, in: Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp (oorspronkelijk 1979), pp. 211-259.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Koselleck, R. (1989b) ‘Erfahrungsraum’ und ‘Erwartungshorizont’ – zwei historische Kategorien, in: Vergangene Zukunft. Zur Semantik geschichtlicher Zeiten. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp(oorspronkelijk 1979), pp. 349-375.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Kristol, I.(1995)Neo-conservatism. The Autobiography of an Idea. New York: The Free Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Luhmann, N.(1984)Soziale Systeme. Grundriß einer allgemeine Theorie. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Margalit, A.(2010)On compromise and rotten compromises. Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Mohler, A.(1989)Die konservative Revolution in Deutschland 1918-1932. Ein Handbuch [Dritter/vierter um einen Ergänzungsband mit Korrigenda erweiterte Fassung]. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft,.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Postoutenko, K.(2011)From Asymmetries to Concepts, in: K.Junge, K.Postoutenko (red.) Asymmetrical Concepts after Reinhart Koselleck. Historical Semantics and Beyond. Bielefeld: transcript, pp. 197-251.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Robertson, R.(1992)Globalization. Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Schmitt, C.(1984)Politische Theologie II. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot (oorspronkelijk 1970).
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Scheijen, S.(2019)De avant-gardisten. De Russische Revolutie in de kunst, 1917-1935. Amsterdam: Prometheus.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Schmitt, C.(1995)Staat, Groβraum, Nomos. Arbeiten aus den Jahren 1916-1969. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Schmitt, C.(2019)Het begrip politiek. Amsterdam: Boom Klassiek/Parrèsia.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Sen, A. (2006)Identity and Violence. The Illusion of Destiny. New York/London: Norton.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Sloterdijk, P.(2005)Im Weltinnenraum des Kapitals. Frankfurt a/M: Suhrkamp.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Terpstra, M.(2014)Verhalen over restauratie, restauratieve verhalen, in: Ex Tempore, 33.3, pp.151-165.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Terpstra, M.(2016)Omstreden moderniteit. Over de gemeenplaats “Dat is niet meer van deze tijd”. Nijmegen: Wilde Raven.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Terpstra, M.(2017)De zinvolheid van het begrip nationale gemeenschap, Christen Democratische Verkenningen, 4, pp. 40-47.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Terpstra, M.(2019)Wie oordeelt in geval van onenigheid? Een politiek-theologische reflectie over conflict, in: M.Terpstra & Th.de Wit (red.), Waarom tolerantie niet de hoogste waarde kan zijn. Over de omgang met heilige zaken. Eindhoven: Damon.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Terpstra, M.(2020)Intensifying and De-intensifying Distinctions. A Meditation on Imagining the Form of a Border, in: Interdisciplinary Journal for Religion and Transformation in Contemporary Society, 5.2, pp. 493-515.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Voegelin, E.(1974)The Ecumenic Age. Order and History, Volume Four. Baton Rouge/London: Louisiana State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Walzer, M.(1985)Exodus and Revolution. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5117/ANTW2020.2.003.TERP
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): (a)symmetrical distinctions; cosmopolitism; nationalism; neutralisation; oikophobia
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error