Resisting Biopolitics

IF 1.4 3区 社会学 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Ville Suuronen
{"title":"Resisting Biopolitics","authors":"Ville Suuronen","doi":"10.1177/0304375418789722","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Hannah Arendt’s support for the “right to have rights” arises as a critical response to the modern biopolitical human condition. While Arendt’s reflections on human rights have received broad recognition, the question concerning the economic preconditions of citizenship in her work remains an unduly neglected subject. This article takes up this issue and argues that, for Arendt, the fulfillment of basic social rights is the sine qua non without which the fulfillment of political rights is impossible. Thinking with and against Arendt, I show that her famous distinction between the private, the social, and the political can be fruitfully reinterpreted as an argument for basic income. When Arendt’s reflections on human rights are read in the light of her ideas concerning technology and automation, she no longer appears as a theorist who ignores social justice, but as a thinker who seeks to counter the modern biopolitical human condition and open up new realms for democratic political action. Instead of ignoring social questions, Arendt argues that with the help of technology, we can strive to politicize fundamental social questions in a way that they would achieve a self-evident stature as human rights, and as fundamental human rights, rise above political debate, even though we would remain conscious of their political origins. Arendt does not simply exclude “the social questions” from politics but argues that this is what all technologically developed societies can strive to do. In Arendt’s futuristic vision, the private life of citizens will be politicized through technological intervention: ancient slaves will be replaced by machines. By comparing Arendt with Foucault and Agamben, I maintain that a critical reading of her work can provide us with a pathway toward understanding the right to life’s basic necessities, to zoe, as a future human right.","PeriodicalId":46677,"journal":{"name":"Alternatives","volume":"43 1","pages":"35 - 53"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2018-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/0304375418789722","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Alternatives","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0304375418789722","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Hannah Arendt’s support for the “right to have rights” arises as a critical response to the modern biopolitical human condition. While Arendt’s reflections on human rights have received broad recognition, the question concerning the economic preconditions of citizenship in her work remains an unduly neglected subject. This article takes up this issue and argues that, for Arendt, the fulfillment of basic social rights is the sine qua non without which the fulfillment of political rights is impossible. Thinking with and against Arendt, I show that her famous distinction between the private, the social, and the political can be fruitfully reinterpreted as an argument for basic income. When Arendt’s reflections on human rights are read in the light of her ideas concerning technology and automation, she no longer appears as a theorist who ignores social justice, but as a thinker who seeks to counter the modern biopolitical human condition and open up new realms for democratic political action. Instead of ignoring social questions, Arendt argues that with the help of technology, we can strive to politicize fundamental social questions in a way that they would achieve a self-evident stature as human rights, and as fundamental human rights, rise above political debate, even though we would remain conscious of their political origins. Arendt does not simply exclude “the social questions” from politics but argues that this is what all technologically developed societies can strive to do. In Arendt’s futuristic vision, the private life of citizens will be politicized through technological intervention: ancient slaves will be replaced by machines. By comparing Arendt with Foucault and Agamben, I maintain that a critical reading of her work can provide us with a pathway toward understanding the right to life’s basic necessities, to zoe, as a future human right.
抵制Biopolitics
汉娜·阿伦特对“拥有权利的权利”的支持是对现代生命政治人类状况的一种批判性回应。虽然阿伦特对人权的思考得到了广泛的认可,但在她的作品中,有关公民身份的经济前提的问题仍然是一个被过度忽视的主题。本文就这一问题展开论述,认为在阿伦特看来,基本社会权利的实现是实现政治权利的必要条件。我赞同或反对阿伦特的观点,表明她对私人、社会和政治的著名区分可以被有效地重新解释为支持基本收入的论据。当我们从阿伦特关于技术和自动化的观点来解读她对人权的思考时,我们就会发现,她不再是一个无视社会正义的理论家,而是一个试图对抗现代生命政治人类状况、为民主政治行动开辟新领域的思想家。阿伦特并没有忽视社会问题,而是认为,在技术的帮助下,我们可以努力将基本的社会问题政治化,使它们成为不言而喻的人权,成为超越政治辩论的基本人权,尽管我们仍然意识到它们的政治起源。阿伦特并没有简单地将“社会问题”排除在政治之外,而是认为这是所有技术发达的社会都能努力做到的。在阿伦特的未来愿景中,公民的私人生活将通过技术干预被政治化:古代奴隶将被机器取代。通过将阿伦特与福柯和阿甘本进行比较,我认为对她的作品进行批判性阅读可以为我们提供一条理解生活基本必需品权利的途径,作为一种未来的人权。
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
Alternatives
Alternatives INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
15.40%
发文量
19
期刊介绍: A peer-reviewed journal, Alternatives explores the possibilities of new forms of political practice and identity under increasingly global conditions. Specifically, the editors focus on the changing relationships between local political practices and identities and emerging forms of global economy, culture, and polity. Published in association with the Center for the Study of Developing Societies (India).
×
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