Jürgen Habermas


Jürgen Habermas is a German philosopher and social theorist in the tradition of critical theory and pragmatism. His work addresses communicative rationality and the public sphere.
Associated with the Frankfurt School, Habermas's work focused on the foundations of epistemology and social theory, the analysis of advanced capitalism and democracy, the rule of law in a critical social-evolutionary context, albeit within the confines of the natural law tradition, and contemporary politics, particularly German politics. Habermas's theoretical system is devoted to revealing the possibility of reason, emancipation, and rational-critical communication latent in modern institutions and in the human capacity to deliberate and pursue rational interests. Habermas is known for his work on the phenomenon of modernity, particularly with respect to the discussions of rationalization originally set forth by Max Weber. He has been influenced by American pragmatism, Action [theory |action theory], and poststructuralism.

Biography

Habermas was born in Düsseldorf, Rhine Province, in 1929. He was born with a cleft palate and had corrective surgery twice during childhood. Habermas argues that his speech disability made him think differently about the importance of deep dependence and of communication. Until his graduation from grammar school, he grew up in a staunchly Protestant milieu in Gummersbach, where his grandfather had been the director of the local seminary. His father,, who was executive director of the, joined the Nazi Party in 1933 and advised it from 1939.
A teenager during World War II, Habermas joined the Deutsches Jungvolk, a junior section of the Hitler Youth, at his father's instigation, and rose to the rank of Jungvolkführer, which allowed him to remain in this formation beyond the age of 14. He organised first aid training as part of medical corps service. From August 1944, his detachment waged anti-aircraft warfare against the Allied advances on the Siegfried Line. He narrowly avoided being drafted into the Wehrmacht at a closing stage of the war, shortly before the arrival of US troops near his home.
He studied at the universities of Göttingen, Zurich, and Bonn and earned a doctorate in philosophy from Bonn in February 1954 with a dissertation written on the tension between the absolute and history in Schelling's thought, entitled Das Absolute und die Geschichte. Von der Zwiespältigkeit in Schellings Denken. His dissertation committee included Erich Rothacker and Oskar Becker, both of whom were former Nazis. Habermas later described the approach of his thesis as Heideggerian and noted that it led him to the work of young Marx via Karl Löwith.
In the mid-1950s, Habermas worked briefly as a journalist. His 1953 article for the right-wing daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung expressed outrage at the publication of Martin Heidegger's 1935 lectures that contained a reference to the "inner truth and greatness" of Nazism, while defending a complete separation between Heidegger's philosophy and politics. Habermas's essay "The Dialectic of Rationalisation" of 1954 sketched the outline for his later work, including his critical engagement with the Western Marxists.
In 1956, Habermas became Theodor W. Adorno's research assistant at the University of Frankfurt am Main's Institute for Social Research. From 1956 to 1959, he studied philosophy and sociology under Adorno and the fellow critical theorist Max Horkheimer at the IfS. He was involved at the time in the early anti-nuclear movement. His work and activities soon provoked strong objections from Horkheimer, who tried to block the publication of Student und Politik. Eine soziologische Untersuchung zum politischen Bewusstsein Frankfurter Studenten written by Habermas with Ludwig von Friedeburg and three others, demanded that Adorno sack Habermas as his assistant in 1958, and made unacceptable demands for revision of his dissertation. Combined with his own belief that the Frankfurt School had become paralyzed with political skepticism and disdain for modern culture, the conflict resulted in Habermas leaving Frankfurt and finishing his habilitation in political science at the University of Marburg under the Marxist Wolfgang Abendroth. His 1961 habilitation work was entitled Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Untersuchungen zu einer Kategorie der bürgerlichen Gesellschaft. It is a detailed social history of the development of the bourgeois public sphere from its origins in the 18th century salons up to its transformation through the influence of capital-driven mass media.
In 1961, Habermas became a Privatdozent in Marburg, and—in a move that was highly unusual for the German academic scene of that time—he was offered the position of "extraordinary professor" of philosophy at the University of Heidelberg in 1962, which he accepted. In 1964, strongly supported by Adorno, Habermas returned to Frankfurt to take over Horkheimer's chair in philosophy and sociology, and reconciled with Horkheimer, who provided a glowing reference for him to the American Jewish Committee in 1965. The philosopher Albrecht Wellmer was Habermas's assistant in Frankfurt from 1966 to 1970.
Following Adorno's death in 1969, Habermas, who had earlier declined the directorship of the Institute for Social Research, recommended Leszek Kołakowski to take up the role in the following year. When the proposal fell through due to opposition from the philosophy department, Habermas published an open letter against the institutionalisation of critical theory. He accepted the position of co-director of the in Starnberg in 1971, and worked there until 1983, two years after the publication of his magnum opus, The Theory of Communicative Action. He proclaimed his definitive break with the Frankfurt School of critical theory in a 1971 letter to Herbert Marcuse. He was elected a Foreign Honorary Member of the American [Academy of Arts and Sciences] in 1984.
In 1983, Habermas returned to his chair at Frankfurt. In 1986, he received the Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize of the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, which is the highest honour awarded in German research. Since retiring from Frankfurt in 1994, Habermas has continued to publish extensively. He holds the position of "permanent visiting" professor at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and "Theodor Heuss Professor" at The New School, New York City.
Habermas was awarded the Prince of Asturias Award in Social Sciences of 2003. Habermas was also the 2004 Kyoto Laureate in the Arts and Philosophy section. He traveled to San Diego and on 5 March 2005, as part of the University of San Diego's Kyoto Symposium, gave a speech entitled The Public Role of Religion in Secular Context, regarding the evolution of separation of church and state from neutrality to intense secularism. He received the 2005 Holberg International Memorial Prize. In 2007, Habermas was listed as the seventh most-cited author in the humanities by The Times Higher Education Guide, ahead of Max Weber and behind Erving Goffman. Bibliometric studies demonstrate his continuing influence and increasing relevance.
He declared himself a supporter of Emmanuel Macron ahead of the 2017 French presidential election.
Jürgen Habermas was the father of Rebekka Habermas, historian of German social and cultural history and professor of modern history at the University of Göttingen.

Teacher and mentor

Habermas was a famed teacher and mentor. Among his most prominent students were the pragmatic philosopher , the political sociologist Claus Offe, the social philosopher , the hermeneutical theologian Hans-Herbert Kögler, the sociological theorist Hans Joas, the theorist of societal evolution, the social philosopher Axel Honneth, the political theorist David Rasmussen, the environmental ethicist Konrad Ott, the anarcho-capitalist philosopher Hans-Hermann Hoppe, the American philosopher Thomas McCarthy, the co-creator of mindful inquiry in social research Jeremy J. Shapiro, the political philosopher Cristina Lafont, and the assassinated Serbian prime minister Zoran Đinđić.

Philosophy and social theory

Habermas has constructed a comprehensive framework of philosophy and social theory drawing on a number of intellectual traditions:
Jürgen Habermas considers his major contribution to be the development of the concept and theory of communicative reason or communicative rationality, which distinguishes itself from the rationalist tradition, by locating rationality in structures of interpersonal linguistic communication rather than in the structure of the cosmos. This social theory advances the goals of human emancipation, while maintaining an inclusive universalist moral framework. This framework rests on the argument called universal pragmatics—that all speech acts have an inherent telos —the goal of mutual understanding, and that human beings possess the communicative competence to bring about such understanding. Habermas built the framework out of the speech-act philosophy of Ludwig Wittgenstein, J. L. Austin and John Searle, the sociological theory of the interactional constitution of mind and self of George Herbert Mead, the [moral development|theories of moral development] of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg, and the discourse ethics of his Frankfurt colleague and fellow student Karl-Otto Apel.
Habermas's works resonate within the traditions of Kant and the Enlightenment and of democratic socialism through his emphasis on the potential for transforming the world and arriving at a more humane, just, and egalitarian society through the realization of the human potential for reason, in part through discourse ethics. While Habermas has stated that the Enlightenment is an "unfinished project," he argues it should be corrected and complemented, not discarded. In this he distances himself from the Frankfurt School, criticizing it, as well as much of postmodernist thought, for excessive pessimism, radicalism, and exaggerations. It was at the Max Planck Institute in Starnberg that Habermas completed his principal work, and Gordon Finlayson has proposed to consider Habermas a member of the first-generation Starnberg school rather than second-generation Frankfurt School.
Within sociology, Habermas's major contribution was the development of a comprehensive theory of societal evolution and modernization focusing on the difference between communicative rationality and rationalization on one hand and strategic/instrumental rationality and rationalization on the other. This includes a critique from a communicative standpoint of the differentiation-based theory of social systems developed by Niklas Luhmann, a student of Talcott Parsons.
His defence of modernity and civil society has been a source of inspiration to others, and is considered a major philosophical alternative to the varieties of poststructuralism. He has also offered an influential analysis of late capitalism.
Habermas perceives the rationalization, humanization and democratization of society in terms of the institutionalization of the potential for rationality that is inherent in the communicative competence that is unique to the human species. Habermas contends that communicative competence has developed through the course of evolution, but in contemporary society it is often suppressed or weakened by the way in which major domains of social life, such as the market, the state, and organizations, have been given over to or taken over by strategic/instrumental rationality, so that the logic of the system supplants that of the lifeworld.
According to the political anthropologist Irfan Ahmad, the influence of Max Weber on Habermas's conceptual framework, as demonstrated by the indebtedness of the 1981 Theory of Communicative Action to Weber's student Talcott Parsons, overrides that of Karl Marx. In that book, Habermas stated that the "market is the most important example of a norm-free regulation of cooperative contexts", which Ahmad regards as an unambiguous sign of his shift against left-wing politics. Habermas had previously distanced himself from the Hegelian Marxism of György Lukács, Adorno and Karl Korsch in his lectures delivered from 1973 onwards and published as Zur Rekonstruktion des Historischen Materialismus in 1976. In a 1979 interview at Starnberg, after crediting Karl-Otto Apel with first labelling him a neo-Marxist around the time of his habilitation in 1961, Habermas commented: "Today I value being considered a Marxist". He added that he was "not a Marxist in the sense of believing in Marxism as a sure-fire explanation. Still, Marxism did give me both the impetus and the analytical means to investigate the development of the relationship between democracy and capitalism". He claimed to be "the last Marxist" as late as 1989.

Reconstructive science

Habermas introduces the concept of "reconstructive science" with a double purpose: to place the "general theory of society" between philosophy and social science and re-establish the rift between the "great theorization" and the "empirical research".
The model of "rational reconstructions" represents the main thread of the surveys about the "structures" of the world of life and their respective "functions". For this purpose, the dialectics between "symbolic representation" of "the structures subordinated to all worlds of life" and the "material reproduction" of the social systems in their complex has to be considered.
This model finds an application, above all, in the "theory of the social evolution", starting from the reconstruction of the necessary conditions for a phylogeny of the socio-cultural life forms until an analysis of the development of "social formations", which Habermas subdivides into primitive, traditional, modern and contemporary formations.
"This paper is an attempt, primarily, to formalize the model of "reconstruction of the logic of development" of "social formations" summed up by Habermas through the differentiation between vital world and social systems. Secondly, it tries to offer some methodological clarifications about the "explanation of the dynamics" of "historical processes" and, in particular, about the "theoretical meaning" of the evolutional theory's propositions. Even if the German sociologist considers that the "ex-post rational reconstructions" and "the models system/environment" cannot have a complete "historiographical application", these certainly act as a general premise in the argumentative structure of the "historical explanation".

The public sphere

In The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, Habermas argues that prior to the 18th century, European culture had been dominated by a "representational" culture, where one party sought to "represent" itself on its audience by overwhelming its subjects. As an example of "representational" culture, Habermas argued that Louis XIV's Palace of Versailles was meant to show the greatness of the French state and its King by overpowering the senses of visitors to the Palace. Habermas identifies "representational" culture as corresponding to the feudal stage of development according to Marxist theory, arguing that the coming of the capitalist stage of development marked the appearance of Öffentlichkeit. In the culture characterized by Öffentlichkeit, there occurred a public space outside of the control by the state, where individuals exchanged views and knowledge.
In Habermas's view, the growth in newspapers, journals, reading clubs, Masonic lodges, and coffeehouses in 18th-century Europe, all in different ways, marked the gradual replacement of "representational" culture with Öffentlichkeit culture. Habermas argued that the essential characteristic of the Öffentlichkeit culture was its "critical" nature. Unlike "representational" culture where only one party was active and the other passive, the Öffentlichkeit culture was characterized by a dialogue as individuals either met in conversation, or exchanged views via the print media. Habermas maintains that as Britain was the most liberal country in Europe, the culture of the public sphere emerged there first around 1700, and the growth of Öffentlichkeit culture took place over most of the 18th century in Continental Europe. In his view, the French Revolution was in large part caused by the collapse of "representational" culture, and its replacement by Öffentlichkeit culture. Though Habermas's main concern in The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere was to expose what he regarded as the deceptive nature of free institutions in the West, his book had a major effect on the historiography of the French Revolution.
According to Habermas, a variety of factors resulted in the eventual decay of the public sphere, including the growth of a commercial mass media, which turned the critical public into a passive consumer public; and the welfare state, which merged the state with society so thoroughly that the public sphere was squeezed out. It also turned the "public sphere" into a site of self-interested contestation for the resources of the state rather than a space for the development of a public-minded rational consensus.
His most known work to date, the Theory of Communicative Action, is based on an adaptation of Talcott Parsons' AGIL Paradigm. In this work, Habermas voiced criticism of the process of modernization, which he saw as inflexible direction forced through by economic and administrative rationalization. Habermas outlined how our everyday lives are penetrated by formal systems as parallel to development of the welfare state, corporate capitalism and mass consumption. These reinforcing trends rationalize public life. Disfranchisement of citizens occurs as political parties and interest groups become rationalized and representative democracy replaces participatory one. In consequence, boundaries between public and private, the individual and society, the system and the lifeworld are deteriorating. Democratic public life cannot develop where matters of public importance are not discussed by citizens. An "ideal speech situation" requires participants to have the same capacities of discourse, social equality and their words are not confused by ideology or other errors. In this version of the consensus theory of truth Habermas maintains that truth is what would be agreed upon in an ideal speech situation.
Habermas has expressed optimism about the possibility of the revival of the public sphere. He discerns a hope for the future where the representative democracy-reliant nation-state is replaced by a deliberative democracy-reliant political organism based on the equal rights and obligations of citizens. In such a direct democracy-driven system, the activist public sphere is needed for debates on matters of public importance as well as the mechanism for that discussion to affect the decision-making process.

Habermas versus the postmodernists

Habermas offered some early criticisms in an essay, "Modernity versus Postmodernity", which has achieved wide recognition. In that essay, Habermas raises the issue of whether, in light of the failures of the twentieth century, we "should try to hold on to the intentions of the Enlightenment, feeble as they may be, or should we declare the entire project of modernity a lost cause?" Habermas refuses to give up on the possibility of a rational, "scientific" understanding of the life-world.
Habermas has several main criticisms of postmodernism:
  1. Postmodernists are equivocal about whether they are producing serious theory or literature;
  2. Postmodernists are animated by normative sentiments, but the nature of those sentiments remains concealed from the reader;
  3. Postmodernism has a totalizing perspective that fails "to differentiate phenomena and practices that occur within modern society";
  4. Postmodernists ignore everyday life and its practices, which Habermas finds absolutely central.

    Key dialogues and engagement with politics

Positivism dispute

The positivism dispute was a political-philosophical dispute between the critical rationalists and the Frankfurt School in 1961, about the methodology of the social sciences. It grew into a broad discussion within German sociology from 1961 to 1969.

Habermas and Gadamer

There is a controversy between Habermas and Hans-Georg Gadamer about limits of hermeneutics. Gadamer completed his magnum opus, Truth and Method, in 1960, and engaged in his debate with Habermas over the possibility of transcending history and culture to find a truly objective position from which to critique society.
During the 1960s, Gadamer supported Habermas and advocated for him to be offered a job at Heidelberg before he had completed his habilitation, despite Max Horkheimer's objections. While they both criticized positivism, a philosophical disagreement arose between them in the 1970s. This disagreement expanded the scope of Gadamer's philosophical influence. Despite fundamental agreements between them, such as starting from the hermeneutic tradition and returning to Greek practical philosophy, Habermas argued that Gadamer's emphasis on tradition and prejudice blinded him to the ideological operation of power. Habermas believed that Gadamer's approach failed to enable critical reflection on the sources of ideology in society. He accused Gadamer of endorsing a dogmatic stance toward tradition, which made it difficult to identify distortions in understanding. Gadamer countered that refusing the universal nature of hermeneutics was the more dogmatic stance because it affirmed the deception that the subject can free itself from the past.

Habermas and Foucault

There is a dispute concerning whether Michel Foucault's ideas of "power analytics" and "genealogy" or Jürgen Habermas's ideas of "communicative rationality" and "discourse ethics" provide a better critique of the nature of power in society. The debate compares and evaluates the central ideas of Habermas and Foucault as they pertain to questions of power, reason, ethics, modernity, democracy, civil society, and social action.

Habermas and Apel

Habermas and Karl-Otto Apel both support a postmetaphysical, universal moral theory, but they disagree on the nature and justification of this principle. Habermas disagrees with Apel's view that the principle is a transcendental condition of human activity, while Apel asserts that it is. They each criticize the other's position. Habermas argues that Apel is too concerned with transcendental conditions, while Apel argues that Habermas doesn't value critical discourse enough.

Habermas and Rawls

There is a debate between Habermas and John Rawls. The debate centers around the question of how to do political philosophy under conditions of cultural pluralism, if the aim of political philosophy is to uncover the normative foundation of a modern liberal democracy. Habermas believes that Rawls's view is inconsistent with the idea of popular sovereignty, while Rawls argues that political legitimacy is solely a matter of sound moral reasoning or that democratic will formation has been unduly downgraded in his theory.

''Historikerstreit'' (historians' dispute)

Habermas is famous as a public intellectual as well as a scholar; most notably, in the 1980s he used the popular press to attack the German historians Ernst Nolte, Michael Stürmer, Klaus Hildebrand and Andreas Hillgruber. Habermas first expressed his views on the above-mentioned historians in the Die Zeit on 11 July 1986 in a feuilleton entitled "A Kind of Settlement of Damages". Habermas criticized Nolte, Hildebrand, Stürmer and Hillgruber for "apologistic" history writing in regard to the Nazi era, and for seeking to "close Germany's opening to the West" that in Habermas's view had existed since 1945.
Habermas argued that Nolte, Stürmer, Hildebrand and Hillgruber had tried to detach Nazi rule and the Holocaust from the mainstream of German history, explain away Nazism as a reaction to Bolshevism, and partially rehabilitate the reputation of the Wehrmacht during World War II. Habermas wrote that Stürmer was trying to create a "vicarious religion" in German history which, together with the work of Hillgruber, glorifying the last days of the German Army on the Eastern Front, was intended to serve as a "kind of NATO philosophy colored with German nationalism". About Hillgruber's statement that Adolf Hitler wanted to exterminate the Jews "because only such a 'racial revolution' could lend permanence to the world-power status of his Reich", Habermas wrote: "Since Hillgruber does not use the verb in the subjunctive, one does not know whether the historian has adopted the perspective of the particulars this time too".
Habermas wrote: "The unconditional opening of the Federal Republic to the political culture of the West is the greatest intellectual achievement of our postwar period; my generation should be especially proud of this. This event cannot and should not be stabilized by a kind of NATO philosophy colored with German nationalism. The opening of the Federal Republic has been achieved precisely by overcoming the ideology of Central Europe that our revisionists are trying to warm up for us with their geopolitical drumbeat about "the old geographically central position of the Germans in Europe" and "the reconstruction of the destroyed European Center". The only patriotism that will not estrange us from the West is a constitutional patriotism."
The debate known as the Historikerstreit was not at all one-sided, because Habermas was himself attacked by scholars like Joachim Fest, Hagen Schulze, Horst Möller, Imanuel Geiss and Klaus Hildebrand. In turn, Habermas was supported by historians such as Martin Broszat, Eberhard Jäckel, Hans Mommsen, and Hans-Ulrich Wehler.

Habermas and Derrida

Habermas and Jacques Derrida engaged in a series of disputes beginning in the 1980s and culminating in a mutual understanding and friendship in the late 1990s that lasted until Derrida's death in 2004. They originally came in contact when Habermas invited Derrida to speak at the University of Frankfurt am Main in 1984. The next year Habermas published "Beyond a Temporalized Philosophy of Origins: Derrida" in The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity in which he described Derrida's method as being unable to provide a foundation for social critique. Derrida, citing Habermas as an example, remarked that, "those who have accused me of reducing philosophy to literature or logic to rhetoric... have visibly and carefully avoided reading me". After Derrida's final rebuttal in 1989 the two philosophers did not continue, but, as Derrida described it, groups in the academy "conducted a kind of 'war', in which we ourselves never took part, either personally or directly".
At the end of the 1990s, Habermas approached Derrida at a party held at an American university where both were lecturing. They then met at Paris over dinner, and participated afterwards in many joint projects. In 2000 they held a joint seminar on problems of philosophy, right, ethics, and politics at the University of Frankfurt. In December 2000, in Paris, Habermas gave a lecture entitled "How to answer the ethical question?" at the Judeities. Questions for Jacques Derrida conference organized by Joseph Cohen and Raphael Zagury-Orly. Following the lecture by Habermas, both thinkers engaged in a very heated debate on Heidegger and the possibility of Ethics. The conference volume was published at the Editions Galilée in 2002, and subsequently in English at Fordham University Press.
In the aftermath of the 11 September attacks, Derrida and Habermas laid out their individual opinions on 9/11 and the war on terror in Giovanna Borradori's Philosophy in a Time of Terror: Dialogues with Jürgen Habermas and Jacques Derrida. In early 2003, both Habermas and Derrida were very active in Iraq War|opposing] the coming Iraq War; in a manifesto that later became the book Old Europe, New Europe, Core Europe, the two called for a tighter unification of the states of the European Union in order to create a power capable of opposing American foreign policy. Derrida wrote a foreword expressing his unqualified subscription to Habermas's declaration of February 2003 in the book, which was a reaction to the Bush administration's demands upon European nations for support in the coming Iraq War.

Religious dialogue

Habermas's attitudes toward religion have changed throughout the years. Analyst Phillippe Portier identifies three phases in Habermas's attitude towards this social sphere: the first, in the decade of 1980, when the younger Jürgen, in the spirit of Marx, argued against religion seeing it as an "alienating reality" and "control tool"; the second phase, from the mid-1980s to the beginning of the 21st century, when he stopped discussing it and, as a secular commentator, relegated it to matters of private life; and the third, from then until now, when Habermas saw a positive social role of religion.
In an interview in 1999 Habermas had stated:
The original German of the disputed quotation is:
This statement has been misquoted in a number of articles and books, where Habermas instead is quoted for saying:
In his book Zwischen Naturalismus und Religion, Habermas stated that the forces of religious strength, as a result of multiculturalism and immigration, are stronger than in previous decades, and, therefore, there is a need of tolerance which must be understood as a two-way street: secular people need to tolerate the role of religious people in the public square and vice versa.
In early 2007, Ignatius Press published a dialogue between Habermas and the then Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Holy Office Joseph Ratzinger, entitled The Dialectics of Secularization. The dialogue took place on 14 January 2004 after an invitation to both thinkers by the Catholic Academy of Bavaria in Munich. It addressed contemporary questions such as:
  • Is a public culture of reason and ordered liberty possible in our post-metaphysical age?
  • Is philosophy permanently cut adrift from its grounding in being and anthropology?
  • Does this decline of rationality signal an opportunity or a deep crisis for religion itself?
In this debate a shift of Habermas became evident—in particular, his rethinking of the public role of religion. Habermas stated that he wrote as a "methodological atheist," which means that when doing philosophy or social science, he presumed nothing about particular religious beliefs. Yet while writing from this perspective his evolving position towards the role of religion in society led him to some challenging questions, and as a result conceding some ground in his dialogue with the future Pope, that would seem to have consequences which further complicated the positions he holds about a communicative rational solution to the problems of modernity. Habermas believes that even for self-identified liberal thinkers, "to exclude religious voices from the public square is highly illiberal."
In addition, Habermas has popularized the concept of "post-secular" society, to refer to current times in which the idea of modernity is perceived as unsuccessful and at times, morally failed, so that, rather than a stratification or separation, a new peaceful dialogue and coexistence between faith and reason must be sought to learn mutually.

Socialist dialogue

Habermas has sided with other 20th-century commentators on Marx such as Hannah Arendt who have indicated concerns with the limits of totalitarian perspectives often associated with Marx's over-estimation of the emancipatory potential of the forces of production. Arendt had presented this in her book The Origins of Totalitarianism and Habermas extends this critique in his writings on functional reductionism in the life-world in his Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. As Habermas states:
Habermas reiterated the positions that what refuted Marx and his theory of class struggle was the "pacification of class conflict" by the welfare state, which had developed in the West "since 1945", thanks to "a reformist relying on the instruments of Keynesian economics". Italian philosopher and historian Domenico Losurdo criticised the main point of these claims as "marked by the absence of a question that should be obvious:— Was the advent of the welfare state the inevitable result of a tendency inherent in capitalism? Or was it the result of political and social mobilization by the subaltern classes—in the final analysis, of a class struggle? Had the German philosopher posed this question, perhaps he would have avoided assuming the permanence of the welfare state, whose precariousness and progressive dismantlement are now obvious to everyone".
In 1973, Habermas noted "the incompatibility of the imperatives that rule the capitalistic economic system with a democratic process for forming the public will". His critique of capitalism has focused on its technocratic tendencies.

Controversy about wars

In 1999, Habermas addressed the Kosovo War. Habermas defended NATO's intervention in an article for Die Zeit, which stirred controversy.
In 2002, Habermas argued that the United States should not go to war in Iraq.
On 13 November 2023, Habermas and co-authors issued a statement arguing that Israel's military response to the "extreme atrocity" of the Hamas-led attack on Israel was "justified in principle". Although questions of proportionality and civilian casualties can rightly be asked about the Israeli response, the statement maintained that such critiques cannot justly attribute "genocidal intentions" to Israel's actions and, furthermore, should in any case not lead to antisemitism.

European Union

Referencing Hegel's concept of the, used to describe the progressive realisation of freedom in history unbeknown to individuals, Habermas has stated that the euro represents the "cunning of economic reason".
During the European debt crisis, Habermas criticized Angela Merkel's leadership in Europe. In 2013, Habermas clashed with Wolfgang Streeck, who argued the kind of European federalism espoused by Habermas was the root of the continent's crisis.

Awards