Abstract
The conference on critical theory has always been for me a place where we can engage in critical discussion on important and current trends in society, politics and culture, and also an opportunity to network and foster friendly cooperation with colleagues from numerous places. It was my teachers and ex-teachers at Charles University in Prague who introduced me to the conference the year after it was first held in Prague and invited me to the discussions. Prior to this, of course, I had known about the colloquia that were hosted in Yugoslavia and that, as far as we were concerned, were primarily linked with the name of Jürgen Habermas.
When Alessandro Ferrara, in agreement with his conference co-organizers, started interacting with the Institute of Philosophy at the Czechoslovak Academy of Sciences in 1992, the leading role here was played by Josef Zumr, the institute’s first director after the 1989 revolution. His position of director was not only executive, but also politically symbolic. Zumr was one of the intellectual figures spearheading the generation of reformist communism that pursued democratization of socialism in the 1960s. He has been a specialist in Czech critical philosophy in the 19th and the 20th centuries. The Soviet troops having occupied Prague in 1968, he was expelled from academia in the 1970s and 1980s. After the 1989 revolution, his academic excellence and hopes of revitalizing the democratic transformation fuelled his appointment to the institute’s directorship. To this day, he sympathizes with an idea of democratic socialism. He deserves big thanks for providing a backdrop and support for the establishment of the conference in Prague.
Another colleague to whom we owe a particular debt of gratitude is Josef Velek, a specialist in Habermas’ theory. Already during the perestroika in the 1980s, he together with other Czech reformists stoked up discussions on democratization. In the 1990s, he had a hand in the transformation of the Institute of Philosophy and exercised a crucial influence on the revitalization of Czech political philosophy, especially with his translations of and commentaries on key works. From the outset, he was in charge of the Czech side in organizing the conference. After getting to know my way around more after joining the Institute of Philosophy in 1996, I assisted him a little in the second half of the 1990s. However, I was busy doing my doctorate studies in Prague and in Oxford. On returning to Prague, I was able to take on various organizational duties and subsequently – in 2000 – became one of the conference directors.
I was fascinated by the critical and explanatory approaches, creative normative theories, prospects to change the practice, and friendly atmosphere permeating the conference. I might mention, purely for the sake of example, discussions on recognition and redistribution initiated by Axel Honneth and Nancy Fraser, and debates on exemplary universalism stimulated by Alessandro Ferrara. It has been a privilege to work also with other current and previous conference co-directors Rainer Forst, Bill Scheuerman, Hartmut Rosa, María Pía Lara, Maeve Cooke, Amy Allen, Jean Cohen, Peter Dews and Hubertus Buchstein; and with other colleagues, too.
I have tried to contribute to the conference in various ways, specifically against the background of the intellectual, political and cultural landscape in Prague. Prague’s geopolitical location, the friendly atmosphere of the charming historic city and its understanding of both East and West have made it a favourite venue for meetings and conferences. Where we were once part of the East and the Soviet bloc, now we are part of the European Union and belong to the West. Moreover, there followed the period when we had an intensive cooperation with the developing countries after they had liberated themselves from colonialism in the 1960s and 1970s. And there are also other challenges in the new period of global capitalism today. I have always tried to harness the potential of a Prague unique meeting point between East and West, and North and South, in order to enrich the critical theory conference. Besides colleagues from the European countries, I have extended invitations to colleagues from China, Latin America and other regions of the world that have been represented very little, if at all, at the conference in order to discuss also poverty, armed conflicts, global injustice, intercultural dialogue and other issues.
I was able to move forward on a larger scale with these endeavours mainly after I set up in 2006 a transdisciplinary Centre of Global Studies in Prague’s Institute of Philosophy. The historical circumstances worked in our favour because, after 2000, critical local, national, macro-regional and global social movements and forums on the topics mushroomed and grew. It is plainer than ever that it is not possible to formulate a critical theory of global conflicts and injustice without the participation of colleagues from all parts of the world. We are working with the conference’s co-directors and participants to improve this situation. These are all challenges that lie ahead of us at future conferences.