Edward Said's mode of intellectual thinking cannot be categorized in terms of concepts such as liberal, socialist or anarchist. In this sense, Said remained all his life, through his work and his action, an "outsider. " This "outsiderhood" created in him an acute awareness of the world and a critical sense of resistance to all forms of political and intellectual domination. In consequence, Said detects a particularly revealing relationship between a deep-seated commitment to the secular principles of humanism andoutsiderhood as the ideal ontological position for the intellectual.

This essay examines the relationship between Americanism, the distinctive ideology of the U.S. American empire, and the predominant discourse in the age of its war on terror, and Eurocentrism, its competing ideology but nonetheless also its ally in defending the West against different "barbarian" threats. It characterizes them as two different forms of hegemonic identity politics: one based in the idea of the particularity of culture, and the other on the idea of universality. A different form of discourse based on the struggles of the traditional targets of those two ideologies is proposed here as an alternative basis for a different historical projectcentered on the idea of decolonization.

"Torture and Photography: Abu Ghraib" attempts to think the mutual relationships between torture and photography, addressingissues of objectivity, publicity, and distance. In a world where bodies have been divested of human rights, the objectification of the camera seems the perfect complement. Exploring the "prophylactic" character of film, the author proposes human "touch" as always in excess of this objectified state of affairs. Along with memoranda from the Bush administration on the issues of detainee rights and the role of torture in interrogation, the essay engages with the theoretical work of Susan Sontag, Elaine Scarry, Michel Foucault, Georges Bataille, Erwin Straus, and Giorgio Agamben in staking out the intersection of torture and photography.

In Rogues, Jacques Derrida once again examines some central concepts in political theory and ethics, in the context of the post-9/11world and the present American drive to reforge global hegemony. The book is important not only for what it says about the concepts of sovereignty, unconditionality, law, and justice, but also for engaging in an extended way with the thought of Plato, Aristotle, and especially Kant. Bill Martin argues that Derrida’s thought is vitally significant for radical politics. He compares Rogues, as (arguably) Derrida’s last major work (to appear before his passing in October 2004) with Sartre’s last book, Hope Now. Lastly, Martin memorializes Derrida, whom he knew as teacher and friend, as “a kind and generous man who stood for many good things,” and hereflects on the philosophical trajectory that extends from Sartre to Derrida.

For nearly four decades French philosopher René Schérer has been exploring the theme of utopia beneath the radar of what has come to be known in America as “French theory.” In the 1970s, his Fourier-inspired writings on education, childhood, and desire formed part of the intellectual backdrop for France’s sexual liberation movements. In the same utopian vein, Schérer has turned his attention in recent years to the question of hospitality and its vanishing place in the modern world. This essay introduces his work to an English-speaking audience, prefacing the first translation of excerpts of his recent book Hospitalités, and includes a list of some ofhis important works of the past thirty years.

René Schérer’s Hospitalités (2004) is a series of philosophical peregrinations that build on his work Zeus hospitalier: éloge de l’hospitalité (1993; Hospitable Zeus: In Praise of Hospitality). In the first translated excerpt below, Foreword, Schérer introduces his present volume and situates it with respect to Zeus hospitalier. In the second translated excerpt, Reason Astray, he elaborates on his interpretation of the role of hospitality in Immanuel Kant’s “To Perpetual Peace: a Philosophical Sketch” (1795), briefly introduced in the first excerpt.

In this paper I utilize Martin Beck Matuštík’s intellectual biography of Habermas as a means for reflecting on the meaning that criticaltheory has for us in the wake of September 11. I argue that the significant contribution of Matuštík’s book is that it fruitfully continues theconversation about the meaning of critical theory by underscoring the sociohistorical contexts that frame Habermas’s intellectual engagements. Matuštík’s figure of the critical theorist as witness refocuses attention on the critical theorist in context, nevertheless as critical theorists we also need to be mindful of the plurality of disastrous events that continue to shape our world.

This review of Martin Matuštík’s Jürgen Habermas: A Philosophical-Political Profile questions whether Matuštík’s description of theexistentialist dimensions of Habermas’s political theory is adequate to the internal differentiation of Habermas’s conception of a substantive ethical life. In doing so, it questions whether Habermas’ own theory adequately distinguishes between first-person singular and first-person plural ethical discourse. The review closes with a reflection on ethical self-reflection and the collective past, a theme that Matuštík’s book discusses under the theme of “anamnestic solidarity.”

Two questions were addressed to my existential biography of Habermas: Is my use of existential categories to discuss his theorycompatible with his recovery of the publicity of facts and norms? Can I concede a secular reading of anamnestic solidarity to Habermas and retain this conception to sustain a Benjaminian-Kierkegaardian openness of history? The best answer would be to reprint Habermas’s astonishing autobiography from Kyoto (his thank you speech on the occasion of the Koyto Award on 11 November 2004). The second best is first to situate it and then take up the two questions in light of his self-presentation.