黑人的生命很重要,警察暴力和基诺沙谋杀案:在“法律与秩序”集会中物质化种族

IF 1.4 2区 社会学 Q2 ETHNIC STUDIES
Edward Avery-Natale, Pablo Vila
{"title":"黑人的生命很重要,警察暴力和基诺沙谋杀案:在“法律与秩序”集会中物质化种族","authors":"Edward Avery-Natale, Pablo Vila","doi":"10.1177/14687968221087450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We use the 2020 incident of the police shooting of Jacob Blake followed by Black Lives Matter protests and the subsequent murder of several activists by Kyle Rittenhouse as a case study to update the Althusserian theory of interpellation using Deleuzian concepts and the idea of “identitarian articulations.” Specifically, we aim to think more about the capacity to accept or reject an interpellation, and who has those capacities, and why. Here, the “who” above is not the individual ontological subject, but the immanent Deleuzian subject emerging in articulation. We will show, for example, that subordinated subjects will often have less access to the capacity to resist interpellation. This is, in part, because it is difficult for some people to “add” or “subtract” identifications or capacities from their identitarian articulations because of the overdetermining power of hegemonic discourses, such as white supremacy. We will also show that different objects, technologies, and emotions when affecting an identitarian articulation, actualize different capacities, or different intensities of the same capacity, in a given encounter. Most importantly, for the purposes of this article, will be the capacity to manifest an emotion like “fear” or “threatened.” We show that an object like a gun may not appear threatening in particular encounters and in association with certain identitarian articulations even while another object, such as a cell phone, will be imbued with the capacity to induce “fear” or “threat” in another. As we show, unavoidably, in the United States, these capacities are deeply entangled with the racialization of the subject holding the object.","PeriodicalId":47512,"journal":{"name":"Ethnicities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Black lives matter, police violence, and the Kenosha murders: Materializing race in “Law-and-Order” assemblages\",\"authors\":\"Edward Avery-Natale, Pablo Vila\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14687968221087450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We use the 2020 incident of the police shooting of Jacob Blake followed by Black Lives Matter protests and the subsequent murder of several activists by Kyle Rittenhouse as a case study to update the Althusserian theory of interpellation using Deleuzian concepts and the idea of “identitarian articulations.” Specifically, we aim to think more about the capacity to accept or reject an interpellation, and who has those capacities, and why. Here, the “who” above is not the individual ontological subject, but the immanent Deleuzian subject emerging in articulation. We will show, for example, that subordinated subjects will often have less access to the capacity to resist interpellation. This is, in part, because it is difficult for some people to “add” or “subtract” identifications or capacities from their identitarian articulations because of the overdetermining power of hegemonic discourses, such as white supremacy. We will also show that different objects, technologies, and emotions when affecting an identitarian articulation, actualize different capacities, or different intensities of the same capacity, in a given encounter. Most importantly, for the purposes of this article, will be the capacity to manifest an emotion like “fear” or “threatened.” We show that an object like a gun may not appear threatening in particular encounters and in association with certain identitarian articulations even while another object, such as a cell phone, will be imbued with the capacity to induce “fear” or “threat” in another. As we show, unavoidably, in the United States, these capacities are deeply entangled with the racialization of the subject holding the object.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47512,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ethnicities\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ethnicities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687968221087450\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHNIC STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethnicities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14687968221087450","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ETHNIC STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们以2020年警察枪杀雅各布·布莱克事件、随后发生的“黑人的命也是命”抗议活动以及随后凯尔·里滕豪斯谋杀多名活动人士的事件为案例研究,更新了阿尔都塞式的使用德勒兹概念和“同一主义表达”思想的质询理论,我们的目标是更多地思考接受或拒绝质询的能力,以及谁有这些能力,以及为什么。在这里,上面的“谁”不是个体本体论主体,而是在表达中出现的内在的德勒兹主体。例如,我们将表明,从属主体通常很少有机会抵抗质询。这在一定程度上是因为,由于白人至上主义等霸权话语的力量过于确定,一些人很难从他们的身份主义言论中“增加”或“减少”身份或能力。我们还将展示,不同的对象、技术和情绪在影响同一性表达时,在给定的遭遇中实现不同的能力,或相同能力的不同强度。最重要的是,就本文而言,将有能力表现出“恐惧”或“受到威胁”等情绪,将被灌输在另一个人身上引发“恐惧”或“威胁”的能力。正如我们所表明的,在美国,这些能力不可避免地与持有客体的主体的种族化纠缠在一起。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Black lives matter, police violence, and the Kenosha murders: Materializing race in “Law-and-Order” assemblages
We use the 2020 incident of the police shooting of Jacob Blake followed by Black Lives Matter protests and the subsequent murder of several activists by Kyle Rittenhouse as a case study to update the Althusserian theory of interpellation using Deleuzian concepts and the idea of “identitarian articulations.” Specifically, we aim to think more about the capacity to accept or reject an interpellation, and who has those capacities, and why. Here, the “who” above is not the individual ontological subject, but the immanent Deleuzian subject emerging in articulation. We will show, for example, that subordinated subjects will often have less access to the capacity to resist interpellation. This is, in part, because it is difficult for some people to “add” or “subtract” identifications or capacities from their identitarian articulations because of the overdetermining power of hegemonic discourses, such as white supremacy. We will also show that different objects, technologies, and emotions when affecting an identitarian articulation, actualize different capacities, or different intensities of the same capacity, in a given encounter. Most importantly, for the purposes of this article, will be the capacity to manifest an emotion like “fear” or “threatened.” We show that an object like a gun may not appear threatening in particular encounters and in association with certain identitarian articulations even while another object, such as a cell phone, will be imbued with the capacity to induce “fear” or “threat” in another. As we show, unavoidably, in the United States, these capacities are deeply entangled with the racialization of the subject holding the object.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Ethnicities
Ethnicities ETHNIC STUDIES-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: There is currently a burgeoning interest in both sociology and politics around questions of ethnicity, nationalism and related issues such as identity politics and minority rights. Ethnicities is a cross-disciplinary journal that will provide a critical dialogue between these debates in sociology and politics, and related disciplines. Ethnicities has three broad aims, each of which adds a new and distinctive dimension to the academic analysis of ethnicity, nationalism, identity politics and minority rights.
×
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