Non Plus Ultra. On Forms of Cultural Studies in Law

The present article starts off with a lecture of cultural theory as the handling of a rupture, in which the referenda in France and the Netherlands take their part, and that have led to describing Europe rather as radically changing than consisting of a firm shape and structure. Revolutionary or reactionary in that context are expressions that mean both everything, all, nobody and nothing, and Europe's transition into what exactly often posed. Haltern, for example, putting forward a reactivation of normative resources regarding cultural theoretical jurisprudence. With that, he parallels the tendency to recommend cultural sciences as fundamental judicial science, orienting himself on Paul Kahn's draft on judicial culturalism. Falling back on a cultural theoretical analysis is no dispensation for accuracy. Questions regarding judicial genealogy and architecture can be answered neither clearly nor at will. Contributions emerge over and over, with different stories, from different backgrounds and different places, an accumulation of the different European cultures. Which leads to the situation that cultural theory remains faced with the impossibility of its own terminology, covering everything from yeast bacteria, to Hooligans, to Haute Couture. In part two, three, four and five, a treatment of cultural theory as a double sided enterprise; cultural theory as the new political theology; cultural theory as cultural theory; and cultural theory as the theory of abundance respectively. References. O. van Zijl