Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Reflecting Weimar-era crises, this study addresses contemporary democratic and technological divisions by proposing an alternative spatiotemporal foundation. It constructs a dialogue between Walter Benjamin’s messianic critique, Carl Schmitt’s sovereign decisionism, and Karen Barad’s quantum ontology. While Schmitt reframed Benjamin’s law-breaking ‘divine violence’ (1921) into the ‘sovereign exception’, Baraddeconstructs this division. Integrating quantum physics into political theology, her ‘spacetimemattering’ collapses the Newtonian empty container-space used to justify sovereign enclosures. This study contrasts Lineage A (Schmitt–Girard–Thiel), relying on static spatial partitions, with Lineage B (Butler–Barad–Keller), viewing spacetime as a relational flow. This relational ontology resonates with East Asian cosmologies, specifically Zhang Zai’s Taeheo (Great Void) and Kim Ji-ha’s Huin-geuneul (Pale Shade). This cross-cultural diffraction demonstrates that the subaltern alliance of Benjamin’s ‘hunchback’ and Kim’s ‘Koraebi (tail-enders)’ exemplifies those marginalized by sovereign divisions. By formulating a relational ontology for these figures, this study provides the essential ‘priming water’ for nonhuman salvation, weaving an integrative knot of violence critique, marginalized redemption, and planetary coexistence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wonjean Lee (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: