Verbatim quote · from the corpus

“At certain points in his thinking, Eric Gans has proposed a post Christian, which is to say post-sacrificial, omnicentric market order that would eschew any single center, perhaps most explicitly in the penultimate paragraph of Originary Thinking: “[t]he historical movement of descralization operates neither through the endless deconstruction of the originary center nor through its definitive rejection, but through its omnicentric multiplication. Even ‘decentralization’ is a dangerous term; what is required is rather the universal proliferation of centers—every human being a center” (219). It is not clear to me how much this should be taken to be prospective rather than descriptive. After all, every country on earth has a president, prime minister or king (indeed, absent such figures, there could be no “international relations”); every country has a political capital, while most have other, economic and/or cultural capitals. Is it possible to speak of an individual as his/her/xir own center without that individual being amply provided with the armor of protective rights? And is it possible to think about rights without thinking about a highly centralized state enforcing those rights? In an omnicentric order (in what sense would it be an order?), would Hamden, Connecticut, have to be as central as Washington, D.C. and New York?”

— Adam Katz, Book Review: Nemesis — The Jouvenelian vs. the Liberal Model of Human Orders (Adam Katz) · Essays & Articles