To this end, she offers a more promising and honest account of the interdependent nature of humans. And this is her story: no one is born an individual, no one can escape radical dependency. No one stands on their own. We all find ourselves dependent upon infrastructures as well as environmental support.
Before turning to interdependency, Butler, however, mentions dependency and the problems it causes, and how there is no overcoming of dependency of childhood. The mirror-stage in Lacan is one Butler with sarcasm and deep seriousness reads as a homosexual scene — it is here man sees himself in the mirror for the first time and falls in love. The a-symbolic structure we are presented with do not offer us an alternative, so is there another way out? The avowal of a politics of interdependency is necessary to imagine global obligations.
But where do we find such obligations in the relation between subjects? To this end, Butler argues that equality presupposes a subject, but not based upon the relational aspect between subjects so that equality emerges as a feature of social relations rather than of subjects. Thus, obligations follows from interdependency insofar as they are needed for any structure. Such obligations, she claims, must be of post-national character and can, therefore, only mean that no borders exists.
What is entailed, is not a call to overcome dependency, but to accept interdependency as the relation of equality — a relational equality. The critique of dependency is illustrated in political economy as well as in relation to the normalisation of colonialism. It is good to overcome dependency, because it often means an end to colonial power and thus emancipation. Independence can lose sight of interdependency, when sovereignty means the sovereignty of the individual.
Consequently, worldly cohabitation becomes difficult to imagine. We cannot be partially individuated and be interdependent — that just sustains conflict, Butler claims. Surely, Butler is not arguing to continue any form of colonial power, but she does remind us of an important lesson in decolonisation processes — that sovereign individualism comes with a price. It is not the only available alternative to the colonial present, and thus she returns to interdependency and violence, and the destructive power of relationality.
Online Guide to Ethics and Moral Philosophy
If we are stuck in individualistic fantasies, interdependency is written over. Such a violence is committed to inequality. How is the human produced? Who counts? Whose life is grievable? The human cannot be the ground of our analysis, as the human is contextually variable and produced through violence. The human is haunted by exclusions. Such an unequal distribution of grievability is operative in life — it marks the value of creatures and decides if they can be treated equally.
Thus, equal grievability is linked to interdependency, it is a relational character of equality, which minimises harm and destruction. As Butler writes elsewhere, and reworks her own conception of the bio-political writ large:. How that interdependency is avowed or disavowed and instituted or not has concrete implications for who survives, who thrives, who barely makes it, and who is eliminated or left to die.
I want to insist on this interdependency precisely because when nations such as the US or Israel argue that their survival is served by war, a systematic error is committed. This is because war seeks to deny the ongoing and irrefutable ways in which we are all subject to one another, vulnerable to destruction by the other, and in need of protection through multilateral and global agreements based on the recognition of a shared preciousness Butler, Distinguishing violence from non-violence is difficult in a world of strategic war.
Semantically we have stabilised both terms violence and non-violence in such a rendering, and yet we need to understand how power through violence is framed.
- The Independent (07 October 2015).
- The Melting Pot in Israel: The Commission of Inquiry Concerning Education in the Immigrant Camps During the Early Years of the State!
- Undoing ethics: Butler on precarity, opacity and responsibility — Monash University.
- Diagram Cohomology and Isovariant Homotopy Theory.
- Frames Of War: When Is Life Grievable? | Frieze.
- Edited by Roger Crisp.
Can we map it on a political frame so we can make sense of our public sense of practice? Anddevelop a meaning of what violence is, in order to seek a new biopolitical abandonment of violence — to break open the horizon and fight those committed to destruction — to perform the counter-strike to the strike?
We need a new perception, a new imaginary, which has no sorrow, where lives are sustainable, liveable, and equally grievable. Relations between people are persistent and interdependent. We might live in the impossible world, the opened struggle — but we cannot fail to subdue destruction. This requires a radical rethink of our current and prevailing conceptions of responsibility, which need not be individualised and must not drift towards new forms of imperialism. But rather recognise and think anew the facticity of our radical interdependency and ontological vulnerability to one another.
Can this situation of mourning — one that is so dramatic for those in social movements who have undergone innumerable losses — supply a perspective by which to begin to apprehend the contemporary global situation. Her research interests are postcolonial and feminist theory, gender, kinship and the sociology of human rights. Notify me of follow-up comments by email. Notify me of new posts by email. Sign in. Log into your account. Password recovery.
Recover your password. Forgot your password?
Frames Of War: When Is Life Grievable?
Get help. The New Pretender. Interdependency as opposed to dependency The avowal of a politics of interdependency is necessary to imagine global obligations. Interdependency and Violence If we are stuck in individualistic fantasies, interdependency is written over. As Butler writes elsewhere, and reworks her own conception of the bio-political writ large: How that interdependency is avowed or disavowed and instituted or not has concrete implications for who survives, who thrives, who barely makes it, and who is eliminated or left to die.
Bibliography Asad, T. New York: Columbia University Press. Butler, J. You have been examining the role that melancholy plays in consolidating heterosexuality out of a larger field of possibilities.
The ethics and politics of vulnerable bodies
There is unavowed grieving involved here, and this condition seems both to entrench the attachment to identity and to complicate the possible political relations between constituencies. A poignant formulation occurs:. This raises the political question of the cost of articulating a coherent identity position by producing, excluding, and repudiating a domain of abjected specters that threatens the arbitrarily closed domain of subject positions.
Perhaps only by risking the incoherence of identity is connection possible.
- Philosophy, Religion, and Classics.
- Copyright information;
- Joseph Butler (1692—1752)!
- Project MUSE - Politics, Power and Ethics: A Discussion Between Judith Butler and William Connolly.
- Butler and Ethics : Moya Lloyd (editor) : : Blackwell's?
I interpret this formulation to mean that people often become profoundly attached to the identities that inhabit them, that the abjection of some other identity possibilities often becomes tempting as a means to secure the self assurance of your own, and that an ethos of plurality is apt to be both fragile and uneven in part because people often refuse to run identity risks to cultivate connections across difference.
This formulation, to me, addresses simultaneously the importance and difficulty of a generous ethos of public life, and it discloses the element of fragility that may persist in such achievements if and when they are achieved. The risks are more palpable than those acknowledged by many self-proclaimed proponents of public virtue. One thinks of liberal communitarians and neo-Kantians here. The theme also may also help to explain why some non-Kantian, cultural Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide.