Abstract
This article investigates the writings of Albert Camus in light of neo-liberal governmentality. Camus, a pied noir born in Algeria, was a key figure in the debates regarding the trajectory of French colonial rule. While his absurdist sensibility denounced absolute conceptions of justice and history, his cosmopolitan humanism rejected the possibility of an independent Algerian nation-state. By examining his literary and political writings, this article sheds light on his conceptions of the individual, natural limits, and legitimate violence. In so doing, it identifies assumptions common to Camus’ notion of the absurd and neo-liberalism while also arguing that the current neo-liberal climate has shaped many of the recent discussions of his work.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank David Theo Goldberg, Dorian Bell, and Mohammad Abed for their comments on an earlier draft of this article.
Notes
1. Such a claim would be especially untenable given Camus’ advocacy for economic collectivism and his early involvement with the French Communist Party.
2. By invoking Republicanism, I am specifically referring to the French tradition in which individual differences would be subsumed within an abstract collectivity. Based on the principles of 1789, Republicanism crystallized under the Third Republic and is often cited as a driving force in the civilizing mission. Anne Conklin has described it as: ‘an emancipatory and universalistic impulse that resisted tyranny; an ideal of self-help and mutualism that included a sanctioning of state assistance to the indigent when necessary; anticlericalism, and its attendant faith in reason, science, and progress; an ardent patriotism founded on the creation of a loyal, disciplined and enlightened citizenry; and a strong respect for the individual, private property, and morality’ (Conklin, Citation1997, pp. 7–8).