Settler colonialism is structured in part according to the principle of civilizational progress yet the roots of this doctrine are not well understood. Disparate ideas of progress and practices related to colonial dispossession and domination can be traced back to the Enlightenment, and as far back as ancient Greece, but there remain unexplored logics and continuities. I argue that civilizational progress and settler colonialism are structured according to the opposition between politics governed by reason or faith and the figure of (...) the child as sinful or bestial. Thus, it is not contingent, but rather necessary that justificatory frameworks of European empire and colonialism depict Indigenous peoples as children. To illustrate how the theoretical link between Indigenous peoples and children emerges not as a simple analogy, but rather, as the source of the premodern/modern and savage/civilized binaries, I trace the various historical iterations of the political/childhood opposition through the classical, medieval, enlightenment, and modern eras. I show how the model of civilizational progress from a premodern and savage state of childhood continues to serve as the model for settler colonial exclusion and domination of Indigenous peoples. (shrink)
The binary between the figure of the child and the fully human being is invoked with regularity in analyses of race, yet its centrality to the conception of race has never been fully explored. For most commentators, the figure of the child operates as a metaphoric or rhetorical trope, a non-essential strategic tool in the perpetuation of White supremacy. As I show in the following, the child/human binary does not present a contingent or merely rhetorical construction but, rather, a central (...) feature of racialization. Where Black peoples are situated as objects of violence it is often precisely because Blackness has been identified with childhood and childhood is historically identified as the archetypal site of naturalized violence and servitude. I proceed by offering a historical account of how Black peoples came to inherit the subordination and dehumanization of European childhood and how White youth were subsequently spared through their partial categorization as adults. (shrink)
The deliberative systems approach is a recent innovation within the tradition of deliberative democratic theory. It signals an important shift in focus from the political legitimacy produced within isolated and formal sites of deliberation (e.g., Parliament or deliberative mini-publics), to the legitimacy produced by a number of diverse interconnected sites. In this respect, the deliberative systems (DS) approach is better equipped to identify and address defects arising from the systemic influences of power and coercion. In this article, I examine one (...) of the least explored and least understood defects: the exclusion of non-speaking political actors generated by the uniform privileging of speech in all sites within a system. Using the examples of prefigurative protest, Indigenous refusal to deliberate, and the non-deliberative agency of disabled citizens, I argue that the DS approach allows theorists to better understand forms of domination related to the imposition of speech on those who are either unwilling or unable to speak. (shrink)
« No pasaran » (ils ne passeront pas). Devant les micros del Ministerio de Gobernacion, la députée communiste Dolorès Ibarruri officialise le mot d’ordre destiné à unir les forces de gauche contre les rebelles fascistes. En ce 19 juillet 1936, au lendemain du coup d’Etat nationaliste, les défenseurs de la démocratie viennent de trouver leur cri de ralliement ; une femme, qui devient un mythe, incarne la lutte. Les facettes de cette construction imaginaire se dévoilent aisément : voix du peup..
With his ontology of anxiety, as developed by Paul Tillich in his well-known work, “The Courage to Be”, he creates, by his own claim, a foundation for dealing with the phenomenon of anxiety in a variety of disciplines, which also serves as a foundation for the well-known American existential psychotherapist Rollo May. However, this does not remain a one-sided influence, but rather an interest in the works of both thinkers with reciprocal interdependencies.
This paper motivates the idea that social robots should be credited as moral patients, building on an argumentative approach that combines virtue ethics and social recognition theory. Our proposal answers the call for a nuanced ethical evaluation of human-robot interaction that does justice to both the robustness of the social responses solicited in humans by robots and the fact that robots are designed to be used as instruments. On the one hand, we acknowledge that the instrumental nature of robots and (...) their unsophisticated social capabilities prevent any attribution of rights to robots, which are devoid of intrinsic moral dignity and personal status. On the other hand, we argue that another form of moral consideration—not based on rights attribution—can and must be granted to robots. The reason is that relationships with robots offer to the human agents important opportunities to cultivate both vices and virtues, like social interaction with other human beings. Our argument appeals to social recognition to explain why social robots, unlike other technological artifacts, are capable of establishing with their human users quasi-social relationships as pseudo-persons. This recognition dynamic justifies seeing robots as worthy of moral consideration from a virtue ethical standpoint as it predicts the pre-reflective formation of persistent affective dispositions and behavioral habits that are capable of corrupting the human user’s character. We conclude by drawing attention to a potential paradox drawn forth by our analysis and by examining the main conceptual conundrums that our approach has to face. (shrink)
This article provides a discussion of the concepts of politics, sovereignty and man in the thinking of CARL SCHMITT and THOMAS HOBBES, clarifying certain similarities and differences between the two authors. It attempts to understand the well-known theory of the German author concerning that which is political, as drawn from the struggle and distinction between friend/foe in light of the threat posed by the Hobbesian state of nature and the meaning of war. These ideas call for a State that does (...) not arise as the result of a contract, but from unity based on exclusions, according to SCHMITT. The Acerca de los conceptos de política Dolores Marcos y soberanía en Carl Schmitt y Thomas Hobbes need for an absolute power that can protect and coerce connects with certain features of HOBBES´ Leviathan. Finally, the conflictive dimension of man is understood as essential for the political realm, which is based, precisely, on egotistical and dange rous features in human beings. Understanding this sphere turns out to be essential for developing an approach to the resolution of conflicts. (shrink)