After the Debray / Girard and Julliard / Michéa here Badiou / Gauchet. This fall the trend is to the intellectual dialogues and this is probably a sign of the times before the blocked horizon of the economic and social prospects, the sinister character of the political perspective of leading intellectuals feel the need to leave their cantonments. This is great but that the situation is serious. Those who expected of this summit, this is still two of the most influential philosophers of our time, a user manual, will not be disappointed hold. At most they will have shared insights, and if they accept the findings of one or the other, a sort of sacrament to deepen by themselves the proposed action. For the ways of Alain Badiou and Marcel Gauchet are incompatible. The first continues to hope in the "communist hypothesis" (that is the term he uses), a hypothesis that has little to do with the French Communist Party but more with an inspired revolutionary process Maoism that hardly defined in the context of today. The second puts his hopes in a democratic deepening of capitalism, still aware that reformism is currently gutted and essentially is to reverse the social gains. Yet both agree on the finding of a current unacceptable situation and going towards even worse tomorrow. Marcel Gauchet proves equally "rebellious" Alain Badiou, and so-called "structural reforms" do to him accelerate the disintegration of society. And one is the other stand mutual praise the policy become rare nowadays. This is Alain Badiou said that "Politics is the dimension of life which a subject can produce a universalizable other and born himself in this report. This is the instance where a subject engages in a trial opens it to himself, but also opens the group to which it belongs to a universal. We leave the area of solipsistic folding ... The policy makes us, first scattered individuals, subjects who embark a collective project capable of adjusting the common vision of federated wishes ... This is always a principled impartiality in political subjectivity. The subject is one that is free of the self-centered demands and claims to transindividual imperatives. ..N'abandonnons therefore not subject to encapsulate economists who in the figure of the individual, his personal appetites and narrow freedoms. " What Marcel Gauchet says, "The subject and subjectivity not designate a permanent property of the actor, a continuous state that would define in general, but a stage when it accessed in specific situations ... Politics is one of the possible modes of subjectivity. This is not the only (Gauchet cites science, ethics, aesthetics). But it is a fashion capital, and it must be remembered, because the strictly political dimension the history of modern subjectivity is too often forgotten. " Finally Alain Badiou suggests the need for the communist hypothesis to make some credibility to the reformist hypothesis because it 's has seen since the collapse of the Soviet system, capitalism thinks any permit and runs wild every day. Marcel Gauchet accepts this strategic ally. A beautiful dialogue, demanding but very accessible, he should not expect anything other than what he can give (the title refers to the famous Lenin's book is this view of "inflated" unless he n ' there is a touch of humor) but is interesting enough as it is.
