In France, Psychoanalysis, Rule of the Clan on June 5, 2013 at 7:18 pm
Prof. Jeanne L. Schroeder of Cardozo Law School has written a fine, thoughtful, extended (and complimentary) review of The Rule of the Clan in which she reads my book through the framework of Hegelian philosophy and the psychoanalytic theory of French post-structuralist Jacques Lacan. She concludes: “In his defense of the classical liberal ideal of individual rights and equality, Weiner implicitly rejects one of liberalism’s founding propositions: a vision of the free individual in the state of nature. Weiner’s thesis is more consistent with the speculative tradition of Continental theory than with American liberalism.”
The link provided is to an abstract of Prof. Schroeder’s review on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), where you can download her full, twenty-seven-page text. I understand that Prof. Schoeder will be sending her essay to law reviews in the upcoming submission cycle. I’m exceptionally gratified by the review, and very moved that my book inspired such deep intellectual engagement by a colleague.
In the meantime, this must be a good week for Francophilia, because “The Call of the Clan,” my recent essay for Foreign Policy, has just been published in French translation for Salte.fr as “De l’union européenne à l’Afghanistan … L’appel du clan,” in a translation by Peggy Sastre. Merci beaucoup, amis et compatriotes!
In Affirmative action, Constitutional law, Cross-cultural encounters & comparisons, France, India, Race on October 1, 2012 at 10:52 pm
The U.S. Supreme Court has begun its new term (it does so the first Monday of each October), and it soon will hear oral arguments in the case of Fisher v. University of Texas. The Court’s decision in the case could be a turning-point in its jurisprudence of affirmative action, and perhaps a political turning-point for the nation. At issue is the legality of using race as a basis for preferring one candidate over another in college and university admissions.
A great deal has and will be written about the doctrinal questions at issue Fisher, particularly how the case differs from those the justices have considered in previous disputes about racial preferences. I’d like to offer a global, comparative view.
The issue in Fisher, in essence, is whether from a constitutional perspective the United States ought to resemble India or France. For years, the United States has pursued a middle course between the two nations with regard to race-based preferences. The current Court is now likely to hold that the United States ought to resemble France—which will be something of an irony given the Court’s conservative majority (conservatives in the United States not being known for their Francophilia). Read the rest of this entry »