Jan 11, 2007
World-Historical Individual-ism
In asking in my column yesterday whether George W. Bush might qualify as one of Hegel's"World-Historical persons," I left out one possibility that certainly crossed my mind while thinking about it.
For Hegel, the significance of such figures is not strictly a function of what they intend to do. Their intentions, their passions, even their human failings can prove to be indirect instruments of forces or tendencies in the historical process that they never fully understand.
Might GWB be playing a world-historical role even if his stated plans turn out to be as disasterous as they've been so far? Could his actual significance in the grand scheme of things be as catalyst for the complete destruction of U.S. power in the region?
I don't know. I'm just asking. (I don't endorse teleological thinking, in case you were wondering.) But a recent article in Foreign Affairs seems to suggest that is exactly what is happening.
For Hegel, the significance of such figures is not strictly a function of what they intend to do. Their intentions, their passions, even their human failings can prove to be indirect instruments of forces or tendencies in the historical process that they never fully understand.
Might GWB be playing a world-historical role even if his stated plans turn out to be as disasterous as they've been so far? Could his actual significance in the grand scheme of things be as catalyst for the complete destruction of U.S. power in the region?
I don't know. I'm just asking. (I don't endorse teleological thinking, in case you were wondering.) But a recent article in Foreign Affairs seems to suggest that is exactly what is happening.