Purchase instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Patrick Hayden’s contribution is an extended consideration of the key distinction Camus makes in The Rebel, between rebellion and revolution. Hayden’s chapter begins with a delineation of what he calls Camus’s “para-philosophy”: a stance characterised on the one hand by his often-expressed hostility to systematic philosophy whilst at the same time, on the other hand, featuring a deep, thoughtful, observant, and informed engagement with philosophical sources and questions. Hayden notes that Camus’s primary target in the sections on “Historical Revolt” in The Rebel is above all the propensity of a certain kind of modern philosopher to look at history through an elevated, systematising lens. Paradigmatic here is of course Hegel’s great drama of the alienation and homewards return of Geist (see chapter 10), and Karl Marx’s materialist rewriting of the Hegelian philosophy of history (see chapter 11). The metaphysical and historical revolutionaries, as against the Camusian rebel, look forwards in the light of such totalising visions to a complete overthrow of existing modes and orders. In such a revolutionary Event, they look to see the “end of history”, or a millennial, new dispensation. Contra Sartre et al, Hayden notes that such a critique of revolutionary historicism in no way made Camus a “counter-revolutionary”. Rather, as Foley also stresses (chapter 5), his goal in The Rebel was one of “reclaiming rebellion” from its collapse into forms of revolutionary messianism, and attendant forms of political violence, by drawing upon rebellion to found a philosophy of limits: first, one setting limits against suicide and second, later, one prohibiting murder as a political means.