Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T16:55:47.569Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Eric Voegelin and German Political Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Hans Maier
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

“As I returned, here—I did not return.” With these words of Alfred Doeblin, Eric Voegelin could also have described his German experience of the years 1958 through 1969. That is valid in a general sense, to speak with the poet: “You are no longer the one who left, and you no longer find the home that you left. You don&t know it when you leave, but you suspect it on the way back.” And it is valid in a special sense too, namely, for Voegelin's relationship to German political science. Here too he remained a stranger among strangers, although his presence in Munich left behind important and lasting impulses. Yet a wider reception of his work in Germany came only with delays, and more outside than inside the guild, so that to this day there exists a substantial need of reconsideration by scholars as well as students. Beginners above all encounter in handbooks and introductions only arid clichés about the “Munich School” and its peculiarity, described with few exceptions stereotypically, as “ontological-normative.” But the central figure of Eric Voegelin remains remarkably dimly lit. All the more welcome, then, are the efforts of the initiators of this symposium to illuminate the details of Voegelin's effects in the postwar era. And more welcome still is the long neglected presentation of his major work, Order and History, in German.

Type
Eric Voegelin and Voegelin Scholarship
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 62 , Issue 4 , Fall 2000 , pp. 709 - 726
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Doeblin, Alfred, Schicksalreise (Frankfort, 1949), p. 396Google Scholar

2 Peter Opitz justly bemoans this situation in his “Spurensuche—zum Einfluss Eric Voegelins auf die politische Wissenschaft in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland” “Search for traces—Eric Voegelin's influence on political science in West Germany”[, Zeitschrift fuer Politik 36 (1989): 235–50Google Scholar

3 The so–called Viererkoalition, governing coalition of Bavaria from December 1954– October 1957, was comprised of the Social Democratic Party, the Free Democratic Party, the GB/BHE (Gesamtdeutscher Block/Block der Heimatvertriebenen und Enrrechteten [All-German Block/Block of those expelled from their homes and deprived of their rights]). The prime minister during the years of this coalition was Wilhelm Hoegner, the only Social Democratic prime minister of Bavaria since the Second World War. Hoegner participated in the drafting of the Bavarian constitution in 1946.

4 Statement to the author of Schnabel's former assistant, Henrich Lutz, in the summer semester of 1958.

5 [Trained as an historian in Berlin, Theodor Eschenburg (1906–2000) was involved throughout his life in German politics: first as private secretary to the Social-Democratic Gustav Stresemann in 1928, after 1945, as minister of interior and commissioner of refugees for the new Bundesland of Baden-Wuerttemberg. In 1952, Eschenburg was called to Germany's first chair of political science at the University of Tuebingen. As both helper and critic in the building of West German democracy Eschenburg was often cited by the press as the “conscience of the nation.”[ Details on the controversy surrounding the Munich appointment can be found in Thies Marsen, , Der Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft in Muenchen nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg: Zielsetzungen und Konzeptionen [Building up political science in Munich after the Second World War: Setting of goals and conceptions] (Muenchen: Magisterarbeit, 1999), pp. 140–42Google Scholar. See also an article by Burghard Freudenfeld, “Ein unabhaengiger Mann. Theodore Eschenburg, Anwaerter auf den Muenchner Lehrstuhl fuer Politische Wissenschaften” [“An independent man: Theodore Eschenburg, candidate for the Munich chair of political science”], in the Sueddeutsche Zeitung, 5/6 January 1957. The article prompted an irritated reaction from the dean of the Staatswirtschaftlichen Fakultaet, Otto Hintner, because by this time, the appointment had already gone to Voegelin. The SZ-Chief Editor countered with the remark that it would be difficult “to find a person who knows more of him whom you mention, Professor Voegelin, than the name” (Marsen, , Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft, p. 141).Google Scholar

6 See the reactions in the Muenchner Merker, 28 November, 1958 and the SZ, 28/29 November, 1958; compare Marsen, , Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft, pp. 143–46Google Scholar. Voegelin&s, inaugural lecture appeared in expanded form under the title, Wissenschaft, Politik und Gnosis [Science, Politics and Gnosticism], (Muenchen: Kösel, 1959)Google Scholar. [The same work can be found in English translation in Henningsen, Manfred, ed., Modernity without Restraint: The Political Religions, The New Science of Politics and Science, Politics, and Gnosticism, Volume 5 of The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin (Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press, 2000.)]Google Scholar

7 Maier, Hans, Politische Wissenschaft in Deutschland: Lehre und Wirkung [Political science in Germany: Teachings and effects], (Muenchen: Piper, 1985), pp. 31 ff., 103 ff.Google Scholar; Lietzmann, Hans J. and Bleek, Wilhelm, eds., Politikwissenschaft: Geschichte und Entwicklung in Deutschland und Europa [Political science: History and development in Germany and Europe], (Muenchen: Oldenburg, 1996), pp. 33 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bleek, Wilhelm and Lietzmann, Hans J., eds., Schulen in der deutschen Politikwissenschaft [Schools of thought in German political science] (Opladen: Leske & Budrich, 1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 Among others, in the memorandum for the Staatswirtschaftliche Fakultaet of the University of Munich of 21 October 1959 and in the attached memorandum for the Ministry Director, Johannes von Elmenau, at the Bavarian Ministry for Education and Culture, Munich, of 15 November 1965 (both in the Voegelin Archive in Munich). Because he had had experience with political science departments in the United States, Voegelin was requested by the Culture Ministry to write these memoranda on the development of political science at the University of Munich.

9 Mager, Friedrich, “Lebendige politische Wissenschaften”, [Living political science] SZ, 10/11 10 1959.Google Scholar

10 Notice of 29 October 1959.

11 [Arnold Bergstraesser (1896–1964) studied history, sociology and economics under Max and Alfred Weber at the University of Heidelberg, where he later accepted the chair in Foreign Affairs. Besides being the founder or co-founder of several organizations—among them the German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the Goethe Institute—Bergstraesser was Professor of German Literature and History at the University of Chicago from 1937–53 and author of numerous influential books evincing his comparative and interdisciplinary approach to political science. Hans Maier (born in 1931) remained at the Munich University until his appointment in 1970 as Minister of Culture by Bavaria's incumbent Christian Socialist government. After serving sixteen years as Culture Minister, Maier was appointed to the Romano Guardini chair at the Institut fuer Philosophie, Seminar fuer Christliche Weltanschauung und Kultur-Theorie in Munich, where he remained until his retirement in 1999.] Details on Bergstrasser 's approach to political science can be found in Schmitt, Horst, Politikwissenschaft und freiheitliche Demokratie: Eine Studie zum politischen Forschungsprogramm der 'Freiburger Schule, 1954–1970 [Political science and liberal democracy: a study of the political research program of the Freiburg school] (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1995), pp. 40 ff., 92 ff.Google Scholar

12 Stammer, Otto, ed., Politische Forschung [Political research] (Koeln und Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Lepsius, M. Rainer, Denkschrift zur Lage der Soziologie und der politischen Wissenschaft [Memoranda on the situation of sociology and political science]. (Wiesbaden: Steiner, 1961)Google Scholar; Maier, Hans, “Zur Lage der politischen Wissenschaft in Deutschland” [On the situation of political science in Germany] Vierteljahrshefte fuer Zeitgeschichte 10 (1962): 225–49.Google Scholar

13 Marsen, , Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft, p. 103Google Scholar. [Alois Dempf (1891–1982) was a historian and philosopher who taught at the University of Vienna beginning in 1937 and at the University of Munich beginning in 1949.]

14 Marsen, , Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft, p. 138.Google Scholar

15 See Lietzmann and Bleek, Politikwissenschaft, n7, passim; more generally, see Rupp, Hans Karl and Noetzel, Thomas, Macht, Freiheit, Demokratie: Anfaenge der westdeutschen Politikwissenschaft [Power, freedom, democracy: the beginnings of West-German political science] (Marburg: Scheuren, 1991)Google Scholar, or Rupp, and Noetzel, , Macht, Freiheit, Demokratie Band II: Die zweite Generation der westdeutschen Politikwissenschaft [Power, freedom, democracy volume II: the second generation of West-German political science] (Marburg: Scheuren, 1994).Google Scholar

16 Cited by some as the “jurist of the century”, Hans Kelsen (1881–1973) taught at universities in Vienna, Cologne, Geneva, Paris, Chicago, Harvard and Berkeley. In addition to his drafting of the Austrian Constitution in 1920, Kelsen is best known for developing a system of legal interpretation. His major works existing in English are the General Theory of Law and State (1967), and Pure Theory of Law (1973).

17 [Max Mueller (1906–1994) was a professor of philosophy at the Universities of Munich and Freiburg. His work was heavily influenced by Martin Heidegger, who also taught at Freiburg.]

18 This Voegelin never failed to point out, for the first time in a lecture at a conference entitled “Staatsbuergerliche Erziehung in Deutschland und in den USA” [“The education of citizens in Germany and in the United States”] on 3 April 1960 at the Akademie fuer Politische Bildung in Tutzing. According to lecture notes held in the Voegelin Archive in Munich, Voegelin believed the spiritual confusion in Germany to be greater and more dangerous because it is not “balanced through the customs, the political and moral knowledge of the society”. Voegelin attributed this to the German national history, to the lack of an institutional tradition, to the “removal of the spiritual/moral person from the profane sphere of politics” with pietism. “Politics ceases to be a component of ethics. Power is evil⃛the intellectual confusion the Nazis allowed to emerge is today the same as at that time”.

19 Marsen, , Aufbau der Politischen Wissenschaft, pp. 50 ff., 72 f.Google Scholar

20 Maier, , Politische Wissenschaft, pp. 227, 247 ff.Google Scholar

21 Published in German in Kuhn, H., ed., Die deutsche Universitaet im Dritten Reich: Eine Vortragsreihe der Universitaet Muenchen [The German university of the Third Reich: a lecture series at the University of Munich] (Munich: Piper, 1966), pp. 241–82Google Scholar. The lecture can be found in English translation in Caringella, P., Gebhardt, J., Hollweck, Th. and Sandoz, E., eds., Published Essays 1966–1985 in The Collected Works of Eric Voegelin, Volume 12 (Baton Rouge, LA: Louisiana State University Press, 1990), pp. 1–35.Google Scholar

22 Voegelin, , Die Deutsche Universitaet, p. 246.Google Scholar

23 Voegelin refers here to the German equivalent of the more famous student revolution occurring in Paris in 1968. Like Voegelin, the German students involved in the movement wished to see changes to the structures of both the German university and the postwar German regime. Unlike Voegelin, they used tactics of non-participation, obstruction and demonstration. As in Paris, students influenced by Marxist-Leninist ideology disturbed lectures and blockaded rooms at several universities, especially in Berlin, Frankfort and Munich.

24 Letter to Dr. Hedda Herwig of December 13, 1972, held at the Voegelin Archive at the Geschwister-Scholl-Institutfuer Politische Wissenschaft at the University of Munich. [Professor Herwig is a former graduate student of Voegelin, now teaching at the Heinrich-Heine University in Duesseldorf].

25 [Professor Maier refers here generally to the growing attention Voegelin's work has received in recent years in Germany; this attention has been promoted by the efforts mainly of Peter Opitz and his staff at the Voegelin-Archiv in Munich and of Juergen Gebhardt and Tilo Schabert at the University of Erlangen. More specifically, Professor Maier refers to the recent translation of Voegelin's Order and History into German: it was at a conference celebrating the appearance of the first volume (Israel und Offenbarung) that the above lecture was held. For more complete discussions of both the translation of Voegelin's work into German and contemporary European scholarship on Voegelin, readers are referred to the article by Gilbert Weiss and the review by Barry Cooper in this volume.]