The Critical Subject and the Subject of Critique in International Law and Technology

IF 1.2 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
AJIL Unbound Pub Date : 2023-06-26 DOI:10.1017/aju.2023.20
G. Gordon, Rebecca Mignot-Mahdavi, Dimitri Van Den Meerssche
{"title":"The Critical Subject and the Subject of Critique in International Law and Technology","authors":"G. Gordon, Rebecca Mignot-Mahdavi, Dimitri Van Den Meerssche","doi":"10.1017/aju.2023.20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The making of legal subjects has long been a crucial terrain for critical theory, also in relation to international law, where both emancipatory promises and expressions of power or discipline are tied to how subjects are recognized and enacted. International law's modes of subject-making have therefore been an important site of aspiration, struggle, and critique. While some have celebrated the rise of the individual on the stage of international law, the liberal ideal of legal and political subjectivity lingering in these celebratory accounts has been confronted by different strands of feminist, post-colonial, and Marxist critique. With proliferating use of digital technologies in practices of (global) governance, the making of legal subjects has taken novel forms. Big data manufacture subjects in ways that spark new legal anxieties and destabilize or problematize established patterns of critical engagement. In data-driven practices that we will describe, subjects are no longer exclusively enacted as abstract autonomous entities or classified along stable criteria (of difference or enmity). Sustained by tools of pattern recognition and technologies for the “unsupervised uncovering of correlations,” nascent forms of global governance by data produce subjects as transient clusters of attributes and data points within transient clusters of attributes and data points—bundles of vectors within vectors, only tentatively and temporarily tied together. In this essay, we map out how this mode of subject-making has become prevalent in different domains of international legal practice. We trace these dynamics to changes in the exercise of state sovereignty and the technoscopic regimes—assemblages for information flow, processing, retention, and surveillance—that states rely on.","PeriodicalId":36818,"journal":{"name":"AJIL Unbound","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJIL Unbound","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/aju.2023.20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The making of legal subjects has long been a crucial terrain for critical theory, also in relation to international law, where both emancipatory promises and expressions of power or discipline are tied to how subjects are recognized and enacted. International law's modes of subject-making have therefore been an important site of aspiration, struggle, and critique. While some have celebrated the rise of the individual on the stage of international law, the liberal ideal of legal and political subjectivity lingering in these celebratory accounts has been confronted by different strands of feminist, post-colonial, and Marxist critique. With proliferating use of digital technologies in practices of (global) governance, the making of legal subjects has taken novel forms. Big data manufacture subjects in ways that spark new legal anxieties and destabilize or problematize established patterns of critical engagement. In data-driven practices that we will describe, subjects are no longer exclusively enacted as abstract autonomous entities or classified along stable criteria (of difference or enmity). Sustained by tools of pattern recognition and technologies for the “unsupervised uncovering of correlations,” nascent forms of global governance by data produce subjects as transient clusters of attributes and data points within transient clusters of attributes and data points—bundles of vectors within vectors, only tentatively and temporarily tied together. In this essay, we map out how this mode of subject-making has become prevalent in different domains of international legal practice. We trace these dynamics to changes in the exercise of state sovereignty and the technoscopic regimes—assemblages for information flow, processing, retention, and surveillance—that states rely on.
国际法与技术的批判主体与批判主体
法律主体的制定长期以来一直是批判理论的一个关键领域,也与国际法有关,在国际法中,解放的承诺和权力或纪律的表达都与主体如何被承认和制定联系在一起。因此,国际法的主体制定模式一直是人们向往、斗争和批判的重要场所。虽然有些人庆祝个人在国际法舞台上的崛起,但在这些庆祝的叙述中,法律和政治主体性的自由主义理想一直受到女权主义、后殖民主义和马克思主义批评的不同流派的挑战。随着数字技术在(全球)治理实践中的广泛使用,法律主体的制定采取了新的形式。大数据制造主题的方式引发了新的法律焦虑,破坏了既定的批判性参与模式,或使其出现问题。在我们将描述的数据驱动的实践中,主体不再被专门制定为抽象的自治实体或按照稳定的标准(差异或敌意)分类。在模式识别工具和“无监督的相关性发现”技术的支持下,数据全球治理的新生形式将主体作为属性的短暂集群和属性的短暂集群中的数据点和数据点——向量中的向量束,只是暂时暂时地捆绑在一起。在这篇文章中,我们描绘了这种主体制造模式如何在国际法律实践的不同领域变得普遍。我们将这些动态追溯到国家主权行使和技术制度的变化,这些制度是国家所依赖的信息流、处理、保留和监视的集合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
AJIL Unbound
AJIL Unbound Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
40
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信