In his article, “Remnants of Dissent,” Thomas Docherty explores the relation of dissent to guilty complicity in post-war Europe. The article opens with a consideration of the position of Karl Jaspers in 1945 and examines how Jaspers worked through the various modes of guilt that flowed from diverse modes of living under Nazism. Of particular interest is the status of silence in the face of tyrannical Nazi oppression and murders. The essay explores how the workings of language, and its manipulations by the Nazis, helps to normalize such tyranny and to make resistance to it both dangerous and difficult. The detailed examination finds, via individuals such as Wilhelm Furtwängler and Václav Havel, that there is a vital distinction to be made between dissent and dissidence and that this distinction depends upon the ways in which political discourse is regulated. Thomas Docherty, "Remnants of Dissent" page 2 of 11 CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture 21.3 (2019): Special Issue On Complicity and Dissent. Ed. Nitzan Lebovic

中文翻译：

---

异议残余

托马斯·多彻蒂（Thomas Docherty）在他的文章《持不同政见者的残余》中探讨了在战后欧洲持不同政见者与有罪同谋之间的关系。本文首先考虑了卡尔·贾斯珀斯（Karl Jaspers）在1945年的地位，并考察了贾斯珀斯如何通过纳粹主义下各种生活方式产生的各种内感。特别令人感兴趣的是面对暴虐的纳粹压迫和谋杀时保持沉默的地位。本文探讨了语言的运作方式以及纳粹对语言的操纵如何帮助规范这种暴政并使其抵制既危险又困难。详细的检查通过威廉·富特文格勒和瓦茨拉夫·哈维尔等人发现，异见与异见之间存在重大区别，并且这种区别取决于政治话语的调节方式。托马斯·多彻蒂（Thomas Docherty），“异议残余”，第11页第2页CLCWeb：比较文学与文化21.3（2019）：共谋与异议特刊。埃德 尼赞·莱博维奇