Abstract

Counting himself as a boring liberal who would usually dismiss the likes of thinkers such as Emma Goldman as the radical fringe, Don Herzog purports to engage with Goldman's work in order to interrogate the political centrality of reasonableness among liberals and deliberative democrats. Casting Goldman as a lovesick radical, Herzog invites us to read her activism and politics as an affective stance resulting in an accurate critique of the Soviet state. This move countenances Herzog's perverted depiction of Goldman as a swooning girl in love with anarchism and authorizes his lack of engagement with her searing political critique of capitalism and liberal democracy. Hence, Herzog's strategy--to read Goldman's politics as an emotional stance--serves to undermine precisely the sort of political engagement he claims to celebrate