Jochen Schmon

In their rejection of slavery as a "private" matter, I argue that abolitionists inaugurated the true quarrel between the ancients and the moderns—making possible radical conceptions of patriarchy and capitalism as different, but interrelated forms in which the "tyranny" of slavery exists

Here, I focus on 18th century abolitionist writings, theorizing them as acts of translating the muted demands of the Caribbean slave revolts into the imperial public spheres—the very sites of empire that would also become the discursive staging ground of radical feminist and proletarian movements

My "Abolition" is finally published at Political Concepts: A Critical Lexicon: politicalconcepts.org/abolition-jo... first sketch of my dissertation that explores the conceptual reverberations of abolitionism in Enlightenment discourses as well as in early radical feminist and proletarian movements

La producción de la naturaleza (entrevista con Alyssa Battistoni) Alyssa Battistoni ha publicado recientemente el libro Free Gifts: Capitalism and the Politics of Nature (Princeton University Press, 2025), que propone un análisis teórico-valoral, más que moral, de l...

Spanish translation of my @jhideas.bsky.social interview with @alybatt.bsky.social: "Free Gifts: Capitalism and the Politics of Nature" @princetonupress.bsky.social

sinpermiso.info/textos/la-pr...

2. @jochenschmon.bsky.social on 'abolition'.
www.politicalconcepts.org/abolition-jo...

The Production of Nature: An Interview with Alyssa Battistoni by Jochen Schmon

Alyssa Battistoni discusses her book, Free Gifts, a value-theoretical study of capitalism's appropriation of nature, with Jochen Schmon. They cover the "new materialism," reproductive labor, existentialism, and activism.
@alybatt.bsky.social, @jochenschmon.bsky.social, @princetonupress.bsky.social

Instead of “environmental side-effects” or the economy’s “external byproducts,” it is the “ability to impose pollution on others as another aspect of class power—and the inability to refuse it a form of unfreedom in its own right”

Against the "naïve materialism" that is so-called new materialism and the "moral naturalism" of much Marxist ecology & social reproduction theory - for a critical denaturalization of social relations without "dematerializing" them

It was a great pleasure interviewing @alybatt.bsky.social about her new book "Free Gifts: Capitalism and the Politics of Nature" @princetonupress.bsky.social for @jhideas.bsky.social: “Class rule consists in the power to produce the environment itself"

nssr.academia.edu/JochenSchmon

Is the liberal-republican ‘common good’ not the good of the oligarchs, with the rich continuing to be rich & the poor continue to be poor? The good of democracy is not the good of all, for the poor's good is the wrong to all the other parts that are merely—and only—the rich 10/10

Shays’ Rebellion as the return of the repressed oligarchic unconscious of the Federalist debate: Popular struggles against economic inequality exposed the oligarchic nature of liberal republicanism in its constitutional exclusion of the majority from government 9/10

The majority of citizens, which are poor, could not be politically trusted with their “rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property” (Madison)—an implicit reference to demands of the Massachusetts Peasant Rebellion led by Daniel Shays 8/10

Liberal Republicanism & the Constitutionalization of Oligarchy: Federalist proponents were not only perfectly aware of the oligarchic possibilities of their Constitution, but they even preferred to pave the way for the rich for public office as the ‘most virtuous’ citizens 7/10

Antiquity conceived the rich as incapable of virtuous government, for modern liberals and republicans they are the ‘incarnation of virtuous character’—and thus the part of the citizenry most likely tending to govern in the common interest 6/10

Liberalism’s oligarchic unconscious: Adam Smith not only naturalizes, against the ancients, oligarchic desires as the ‘human condition’ but even claims the individual pursuit of economic self-interest as the ‘invisible’ condition for the achievement of the ‘common good’ 5/10

Ancient & modern republicans see economic inequality as the central antagonism. But while oligarchy is seen as internal danger (republics only authorize ‘a few’ to rule, thus open to the rich) democracy is an external threat (republics always exclude ‘the many’ from ruling) 4/10

We reconstruct the oligarchic unconscious in Aristotle’s ideal Mixed Regime where, similar to modern republics, the ‘virtuous few’ should rule impartially against the direct participation of the rich (oligarchy) and the poor (democrats) 3/10

Based on Federalists & A. Smith, we offer a conceptualization of liberal republicanism as the modern constitutionalization of oligarchy—threatened by Shays’ Debt Rebellion, to be prevented was a ‘pure Democracy’ always resulting in the poor ruling over the rich 2/10

The Oligarchic Unconscious of Liberal Republicanism Click on the article title to read more.

Entering the blue sky with my new Constellations article co-authored w/ Udeepta Chakravarty
 
We inquire the “essentially oligarchic character” of the US Constitution, making Trump its illiberal radicalization

Part of forthc. Oligarchy Special Issue
1/10

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/...

www.academia.edu/127987205/Th...

Is the liberal-republican ‘common good’ not the good of the oligarchs, with the rich continuing to be rich & the poor continue to be poor? The good of democracy is not the good of all, for the poor's good is the wrong to all the other parts that are merely—and only—the rich 10/10

Shays’ Rebellion as the return of the repressed oligarchic unconscious of the Federalist debate: Popular struggles against economic inequality exposed the oligarchic nature of liberal republicanism in its constitutional exclusion of the majority from government 9/10

The majority of citizens, which are poor, could not be politically trusted with their “rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property” (Madison)—an implicit reference to demands of the Massachusetts Peasant Rebellion led by Daniel Shays 8/10

Liberal Republicanism & the Constitutionalization of Oligarchy: Federalist proponents were not only perfectly aware of the oligarchic possibilities of their Constitution, but they even preferred to pave the way for the rich for public office as the ‘most virtuous’ citizens 7/10

Antiquity conceived the rich as incapable of virtuous government, for modern liberals and republicans they are the ‘incarnation of virtuous character’—and thus the part of the citizenry most likely tending to govern in the common interest 6/10

Liberalism’s oligarchic unconscious: Adam Smith not only naturalizes, against the ancients, oligarchic desires as the ‘human condition’ but even claims the individual pursuit of economic self-interest as the ‘invisible’ condition for the achievement of the ‘common good’ 5/10

Ancient & modern republicans see economic inequality as the central antagonism. But while oligarchy is seen as internal danger (republics only authorize ‘a few’ to rule, thus open to the rich) democracy is an external threat (republics always exclude ‘the many’ from ruling) 4/10

We reconstruct the oligarchic unconscious in Aristotle’s ideal Mixed Regime where, similar to modern republics, the ‘virtuous few’ should rule impartially against the direct participation of the rich (oligarchy) and the poor (democrats) 3/10

Based on Federalists & A. Smith, we offer a conceptualization of liberal republicanism as the modern constitutionalization of oligarchy—threatened by Shays’ Debt Rebellion, to be prevented was a ‘pure Democracy’ always resulting in the poor ruling over the rich 2/10