Who Is the Subject of the Rights of Man?" Man?" Jacques Rancière [The South Atlantic Quarterly 103.2/3 (2004 !!. 2"#$310.% As &e 'no& the question raise) *y +y title too' on a ne& co,ency )urin, the last ten years o- the t&entieth century. The Ri,hts o- an or u+an Ri,hts ha) ust *een reuenate) in the seenties an) ei,hties *y the )issi)ent +oe+ents in the Soiet nion an) astern uro!ea reuenation that &as all the +ore si,ni-icant as the 5-or+alis+5 o- those ri,hts ha) *een one o- the -irst tar,ets o- the youn, ar6 so that the colla!se o- the Soiet +!ire coul) a!!ear as their reen,e. A-ter this colla!se they &oul) a!!ear as the charter o- the irresisti*le +oe+ent lea)in, to a !eace-ul !osthistorical &orl) &here ,lo*al )e+ocracy &oul) +atch the ,lo*al +ar'et o- li*eral econo+y. As is &ell 'no&n thin,s )i) not e6actly ,o that &ay. 7n the -ollo&in, years the ne& lan)sca!e o- hu+anity -ree) -ro+ uto!ian totalitarianis+ *eca+e the sta,e o- ne& out*ursts o- ethnic con-licts an) slau,hters reli,ious -un)a+entalis+s or racial an) 6eno!ho*ic +oe+ents. The territory o- 5!osthistorical5 an) !eace-ul hu+anity !roe) to *e the territory o- ne& -i,ures o- the 7nhu+an. An) the Ri,hts o- an turne) out to *e the ri,hts o- the ri,htless o- the !o!ulations hunte) out o- their ho+es an) lan) an) threatene) [n) 8a,e 2"#% *y ethnic slau,hter. They a!!eare) +ore an) +ore as the ri,hts o- the icti+s the ri,hts o- those &ho &ere una*le to enact any ri,hts or een any clai+ in their na+e so that eentually their ri,hts ha) to *e u!hel) *y others at the cost o- shat shatte teri rin, n, the the e)ie)i-ic icee o- 7nte 7ntern rnat atio iona nall Ri,h Ri,hts ts in the the na+e na+e o- a ne& ne& ri,ht ri,ht to 5hu+anitarian inter-erence5&hich ulti+ately *oile) )o&n to the ri,ht to inasion. A ne& sus!icion thus arose9 :hat lies *ehin) this stran,e shi-t -ro+ an to u+anity an) -ro+ u+anity to the u+anitarian; The actual su*ect o- these Ri,hts o- an *eca+e u+an Ri,hts. 7s there not a *ias in the state+ent o- such ri,hts; 7t &as o*iously i+!ossi*le to reie the ar6ist critique.
rench Reolution.1 An) it ha) *een reie) in a si,ni-icant &ay *y annah Aren)t. The ?ri,ins o- Totalitarianis+ inclu)e) a cha!ter )eote) to the 58er!le6ities o- the Ri,hts o- an.5 7n that cha!ter Aren)t equate) the 5a*stracte)ness5 o- 5en@s Ri,hts5 &ith the concrete situation o- those !o!ulations o- re-u,ees that ha) -lo&n all oer uro!e a-ter the >irst :orl) :ar. These !o!ulations hae *een )e!rie) o- their ri,hts *y the ery -act that they &ere only 5+en5 that they ha) no national co++unity to ensure those ri,hts. Aren)t -oun) there the 5*o)y5 -ittin, the a*stracte)ness o- the ri,hts an) she state) the !ara)o6 as -ollo&s9 the Ri,hts o- an are the ri,hts o- those &ho are only hu+an *ein,s &ho hae no +ore !ro!erty le-t than the !ro!erty o- *ein, hu+an. 8ut another &ay they are the ri,hts o- those &ho hae no ri,hts the +ere )erision o- ri,ht.2 The equation itsel- &as +a)e !ossi*le *y Aren)t@s ie& o- the !olitical s!here as a s!eci-ic s!here se!arate) -ro+ the real+ o- necessity. A*stract li-e +eant 5)e!rie) li-e.5 7t +eant 5!riate li-e5 a li-e entra!!e) in its 5i)iocy5 as o!!ose) to the li-e o- !u*lic action s!eech an) a!!earance. This critique o- 5a*stract5 ri,hts actually &as a critique o- )e+ocracy. 7t reste) on the assu+!tion that +o)ern )e+ocracy ha) *een &aste) -ro+ -r o+ the ery *e,innin, *y the 5!ity5 o- the reolutionaries -or the !oor ! oor !eo!le *y the con-usion o- t&o -ree)o+s9 !olitical -ree)o+ o!!ose) to )o+ination 2 an) social -ree)o+ o!!ose) to necessity. 7n her ie& the Ri,hts o- an &ere not an i)eal -antasy o- reolutionary )rea+ers as
This analysis articulate) +ore than -i-ty years a,o see+s tailor$+a)e -i-ty years later to -it the ne& 5!er!le6ities5 o- the Ri,hts o- an on the 5hu+anitarian5 sta,e. Bo& &e +ust !ay close attention to &hat allo&s it to -it. 7t is the conce!tuali=ation *y annah Aren)t o- a certain state o- e6ce!tion. 7n a stri'in, !assa,e -ro+ the cha!ter on the !er!le6ities o- the Ri,hts o- an she &rites the -ollo&in, a*out the ri,htless9 5Their !li,ht is not that they are not equal *e-ore the la& *ut that no la& e6ists -or the+C not that they are o!!resse) *ut that no*o)y &ants to o!!ress the+.53 There is so+ethin, e6traor)inary in the state+ent 5no*o)y &ants to o!!ress the+5 an) in its !lainly conte+!tuous tone. 7t is as i- these !eo!le &ere ,uilty o- not een *ein, a*le to *e o!!resse) not een &orthy o- *ein, o!!resse). 7 thin' that &e +ust *e a&are o- &hat is at sta'e in this state+ent o- a situation an) status that &oul) *e 5*eyon) o!!ression5 *eyon) any account in ter+s o- con-lict an) re!ression or la& an) iolence. As a +atter o- -act there &ere !eo!le &ho &ante) to o!!ress the+ an) la&s to )o this. The conce!tuali=ation o- a 5state *eyon) o!!ression5 is +uch +ore a consequence o- Aren)t@s ri,i) o!!osition *et&een the real+ o- the !olitical an) the real+ o- !riate li-e &hat she calls in the sa+e cha!ter 5the )ar' *ac',roun) o- +ere ,ienness.54 7t is in 'ee!in, &ith her archi!olitical !osition. oucault@s theory o- *io!o&er an) secon) &ith Farl Sch+itt@s theory o- the state o- e6ce!tion. 7n a -irst ste! his ar,u+ent relies on the Aren)tian o!!osition o- t&o lies an o!!osition !re)icate) on the )istinction *et&een t&o Dree' &or)s9 =oe &hich +eans 5*are !hysiolo,ical li-e5 an) *ios &hich +eans 5-or+ o- li-e5 an) nota*ly the *ios !oliti'os9 5the li-e o- ,reat actions an) no*le &or)s.5 7n her ie& the Ri,hts o- an an) +o)ern )e+ocracy reste) on [n) 8a,e 2""% the con-usion o- those t&o li-es&hich ulti+ately +eant the re)uction o- *ios to sheer =oe. A,a+*en equate) her critique &ith >oucault@s !ole+ics on 5se6ual li*eration.5 7n The :ill to Gno& an) Society ust oucault ar,ues that the so$calle) se6ual li*eration an) -ree s!eech a*out se6 are in -act e--ects o- a !o&er +achine that ur,es !eo!le to s!ea' a*out se6. They are e--ects o- a ne& -or+ o- !o&er that is no lon,er the ol) soerei,n !o&er o- Ii-e an) Heath oer the su*ects *ut a !ositie !o&er o- control oer *iolo,ical li-e. Accor)in, to >oucault een ethnic cleansin, an) the olocaust are !art o- a 5!ositie5 *io!olitical !ro,ra+ +ore than reials o- the soerei,n ri,ht to 'ill. Throu,h the *io!olitical conce!tuali=ation &hat in Aren)t &as the -la& o- +o)ern )e+ocracy *eco+es in A,a+*en the !ositiity o- a -or+ o- !o&er. 7t *eco+es the co+!licity o- )e+ocracy ie&e) as the +ass$in)ii)ualistic concern &ith in)ii)ual li-e &ith technolo,ies o- !o&er hol)in, s&ay oer *iolo,ical li-e as such. >ro+ this !oint on A,a+*en ta'es thin,s a ste! -urther. :hile >oucault o!!ose) +o)ern *io!o&er to ol) soerei,nty A,a+*en +atches the+ *y equatin, >oucault@s 5control oer li-e5 3 &ith Farl Sch+itt@s state o- e6ce!tion.# Sch+itt ha) !osite) the state o- e6ce!tion as the !rinci!le o- !olitical authority. The soerei,n !o&er is the !o&er that )eci)es on the state o- e6ce!tion in &hich nor+al le,ality is sus!en)e). This ulti+ately +eans that la& hin,es on a !o&er o- )ecision that is itsel- out o- la&. A,a+*en i)enti-ies 2
the state o- e6ce!tion &ith the !o&er o- )ecision oer li-e. :hat is correlate) &ith the e6ce!tionality o- soerei,n !o&er is the e6ce!tion o- li-e. 7t is li-e as *are or na'e) li-e &hich accor)in, to A,a+*en +eans li-e ca!ture) in a =one o- in)iscerni*ility o- in)istinction *et&een =oe an) *ios *et&een natural an) hu+an li-e. 7n such a &ay there is no +ore o!!osition *et&een soerei,n !o&er an) *io!o&er. Soerei,n !o&er is the sa+e as *io!o&er. Bor is there any o!!osition *et&een a*solute state !o&er an) the Ri,hts o- an. The Ri,hts o- an +a'e natural li-e a!!ear as the source an) the *earer o- ri,hts. They +a'e *irth a!!ear as the !rinci!le o- soerei,nty. The equation &oul) still hae *een hi))en at that ti+e *y the i)enti-ication o- *irthor natiity&ith nationality that is &ith the -i,ure o- the citi=en. The -lo& o- re-u,ees in the t&entieth century &oul) hae s!lit u! that i)entity an) +a)e the na'e)ness o- *are li-e stri!!e) o- the eil o- nationality a!!ear as the secret o- the Ri,hts o- an. The !ro,ra+s o- ethnic cleansin, an) e6ter+ination &oul) then a!!ear as a ra)ical atte+!t to )ra& the -ull consequences o- [n) 8a,e 300%this s!littin,. This +eans that the secret o- )e+ocracythe secret o- +o)ern !o&ercan no& sho& u! at the -ore,roun). Bo& state !o&er has concretely to )o &ith *are li-e.
!ure !olitics ulti+ately +a'es it anish in the sheer relation o- state !o&er an) in)ii)ual li-e. 8olitics thus is equate) &ith !o&er a !o&er that is increasin,ly ta'en as an oer&hel+in, historico$ontolo,ical )estiny -ro+ &hich only a Do) is li'ely to sae us.
7- &e &ant to ,et out o- this ontolo,ical tra! &e hae to reset the question o- the Ri,hts o- an+ore !recisely the question o- their su*ect&hich is the su*ect o- !olitics as &ell. This +eans settin, the question o- &hat !olitics is on a )i--erent -ootin,. 7n or)er to )o this let us hae a closer loo' at the Aren)tian ar,u+ent a*out the Ri,hts o- an an) o- the Fiti=en an ar,u+ent that A,a+*en *asically en)orses. She +a'es the+ a quan)ary &hich can *e !ut as -ollo&s9 either the ri,hts o- the citi=en are the ri,hts o- +an*ut the ri,hts o- +an are the ri,hts o- the un!olitici=e) !ersonC they are the ri,hts o- those &ho hae no ri,hts &hich a+ounts to nothin,or the ri,hts o- +an are the ri,hts o- the citi=en the ri,hts attache) to the -act o- *ein, a citi=en o- such or such constitutional state. This +eans that they are the ri,hts o- those &ho hae ri,hts &hich a+ounts to a tautolo,y.11 ither the ri,hts o- those &ho hae no ri,hts or the ri,hts o- those &ho hae ri,hts. ither a oi) or a tautolo,y an) in *oth cases a )ece!tie tric' such is the loc' that she *uil)s. 7t &or's out only at the cost o- s&ee!in, asi)e the thir) assu+!tion that &oul) esca!e the quan)ary. There is in)ee) a thir) assu+!tion &hich 7 &oul) !ut as -ollo&s9 the Ri,hts o- an are the ri,hts o- those &ho hae not the ri,hts that they hae an) hae the ri,hts that they hae not. Iet us to try to +a'e sense o- the sentenceor )eelo! the equation. 7t is clear that the equation cannot *e resole) *y the i)enti-ication o- a sin,le 6. The Ri,hts o- an are not the ri,hts o- a sin,le su*ect that &oul) *e at once the source an) the *earer o- the ri,hts an) &oul) only use the ri,hts that she or he !ossesses. 7- this &as the case in)ee) it &oul) *e easy to !roe as Aren)t )oes that such a su*ect )oes not e6ist. irst they are &ritten ri,hts. They are inscri!tions o- the co++unity as -ree an) equal. As such they are not only the [n) 8a,e 302%!re)icates o- a none6istin, *ein,. en thou,h actual situations o- ri,htlessness +ay ,ie the+ the lie they are not only an a*stract i)eal situate) -ar -ro+ the ,iens o- the situation. They are also !art o- the con-i,uration o- the ,ien. :hat is ,ien is not only a situation o- inequality. 7t is also an inscri!tion a -or+ o- isi*ility o- equality. Secon) the Ri,hts o- an are the ri,hts o- those &ho +a'e so+ethin, o- that inscri!tion &ho )eci)e not only to 5use5 their ri,hts *ut also to *uil) such an) such a case -or the eri-ication o- the !o&er o- the inscri!tion. 7t is not only a +atter o- chec'in, &hether the reality con-ir+s or )enies the ri,hts. The !oint is a*out &hat con-ir+ation or )enial +eans. an an) citi=en )o not )esi,nate collections o- in)ii)uals. an an) citi=en are !olitical su*ects. 8olitical su*ects are not )e-inite collectiities. They are sur!lus na+es na+es that set out a question or a )is!ute (liti,e a*out &ho is inclu)e) in their count. Forres!on)in,ly -ree)o+ an) equality are not !re)icates *elon,in, to )e-inite su*ects. 8olitical !re)icates are o!en !re)icates9 they o!en u! a )is!ute a*out &hat they e6actly entail an) &ho+ they concern in &hich cases. The Heclaration o- Ri,hts states that all +en are *orn -ree an) equal. Bo& the question arises9 :hat is the s!here o- i+!le+entation o- these !re)icates; 7- you ans&er as Aren)t )oes that it is the s!here o- citi=enshi! the s!here o- !olitical li-e se!arate) 4
4
-ro+ the s!here o- !riate li-e you sort out the !ro*le+ in a)ance. The !oint is !recisely &here )o you )ra& the line se!aratin, one li-e -ro+ the other; 8olitics is a*out that *or)er. 7t is the actiity that *rin,s it *ac' into question. This !oint &as clearly +a)e )urin, the >rench Reolution *y a reolutionary &o+an ?ly+!e )e Dou,es in her -a+ous state+ent that i- &o+en are entitle) to ,o to the sca--ol) they are entitle) to ,o to the asse+*ly. The !oint &as !recisely that equal$*orn &o+en &ere not equal citi=ens. They coul) neither ote nor *e electe). The reason -or the !rescri!tion &as as usual that they coul) not -it the !urity o- 5 !olitical li-e. They alle,e)ly *elon,e) to !riate )o+estic li-e. An) the co++on ,oo) o- the co++unity ha) to *e 'e!t a!art -ro+ the actiities -eelin,s an) interests o- !riate li-e. ?ly+!e )e Dou,e@s ar,u+entation !recisely sho&e) that the *or)er se!aratin, *are li-e an) !olitical li-e coul) not *e so clearly )ra&n. There &as at least one !oint &here 5*are li-e5 !roe) to *e 5!olitical59 there &ere &o+en sentence) to )eath as ene+ies o- the reolution. 7- they coul) lose their 5*are li-e5 out o- a !u*lic u),+ent *ase) on !olitical reasons this +eant that een their *are li-etheir li-e )oo+e) to )eath&as !olitical. 7- un)er [n) 8a,e 303%the ,uillotine they &ere as equal so to s!ea' 5as +en5 they ha) the ri,ht to the &hole o- equality inclu)in, equal !artici!ation to !olitical li-e. ?- course the )e)uction coul) not *e en)orse)it coul) not een *e hear)*y the la&+a'ers. Beertheless it coul) *e enacte) in the !rocess o- a &ron, in the construction o- a )issensus. A )issensus is not a con-lict o- interests o!inions or aluesC it is a )iision !ut in the 5co++on sense59 a )is!ute a*out &hat is ,ien a*out the -ra+e &ithin &hich &e see so+ethin, as ,ien. :o+en coul) +a'e a t&o-ol) )e+onstration. They coul) )e+onstrate that they &ere )e!rie) o- the ri,hts that they ha) than's to the Heclaration o- Ri,hts. An) they coul) )e+onstrate throu,h their !u*lic action that they ha) the ri,hts that the constitution )enie) to the+ that they coul) enact those ri,hts. So they coul) act as su*ects o- the Ri,hts o- an in the !recise sense that 7 hae +entione). They acte) as su*ects that )i) not hae the ri,hts that they ha) an) ha) the ri,hts that they ha) not. This is &hat 7 call a )issensus9 !uttin, t&o &orl)s in one an) the sa+e &orl). A !olitical su*ect as 7 un)erstan) it is a ca!acity -or sta,in, such scenes o- )issensus. 7t a!!ears thus that +an is not the oi) ter+ o!!ose) to the actual ri,hts o- the citi=en. 7t has a !ositie content that is the )is+issal o- any )i--erence *et&een those &ho 5lie5 in such or such s!here o- e6istence *et&een those &ho are or are not quali-ie) -or !olitical li-e. The ery )i--erence *et&een +an an) citi=en is not a si,n o- )isunction !roin, that the ri,hts are either oi) or tautolo,ical. 7t is the o!enin, o- an interal -or !olitical su*ectii=ation. 8olitical na+es are liti,ious na+es na+es &hose e6tension an) co+!rehension are uncertain an) &hich o!en -or that reason the s!ace o- a test or eri-ication. 8olitical su*ects *uil) such cases o- eri-ication. They !ut to test the !o&er o- !olitical na+es their e6tension an) co+!rehension. They not only con-ront the inscri!tions o- ri,hts to situations o- )enialC they !ut to,ether the &orl) &here those ri,hts are ali) an) the &orl) &here they are not. They !ut to,ether a relation o- inclusion an) a relation o- e6clusion. The ,eneric na+e o- the su*ects &ho sta,e such cases o- eri-ication is the na+e o- the )e+os the na+e o- the !eo!le. At the en) o- o+o Sacer A,a+*en e+!hasi=es &hat he calls the 5constant a+*i,uity5 o- the !eo!le that is at once the na+e o- the !olitical *o)y an) the na+e o- the lo&er classes. e sees in this a+*i,uity the +ar' o- the correlation *et&een *are li-e an) soerei,nty.12
le,iti+ate authority.13 Such are the !o&ers o- the +asters oer the slaes o- the ol) oer the youn, o- the learne) !eo!le oer the i,norant !eo!le an) so on.
Forres!on)in,ly con-licts are turne) into !ro*le+s that hae to *e sorte) out *y learne) e6!ertise an) a ne,otiate) a)ust+ent o- interests. Fonsensus +eans closin, the s!aces o- )issensus *y !lu,,in, the interals an) !atchin, oer the !ossi*le ,a!s *et&een a!!earance an) reality or la& an) -act. 7n this &ay the 5a*stract5 an) liti,ious Ri,hts o- an an) o- the citi=en are tentatiely turne) into real ri,hts *elon,in, to real ,rou!s attache) to their i)entity an) to the reco,nition o- their !lace in the ,lo*al !o!ulation. There-ore the !olitical )issensus a*out the !art$ta'in, in the co++on o- the co++unity is *oile) )o&n to a )istri*ution &ithin &hich each !art o- the social *o)y &oul) o*tain the *est share that it can o*tain. 7n this lo,ic !ositie la&s an) ri,hts +ust clin, increasin,ly to the )iersity o- social ,rou!s an) to the s!ee) o- the chan,es in social li-e an) in)ii)ual &ays o- *ein,. The ai+ o- consensual !ractice is the i)entity o- la& an) -act. The la& has to *eco+e i)entical to the natural li-e o- society. To !ut it in other ter+s consensus is the re)uction o- )e+ocracy to the &ay o- li-e o- a society to its ethos+eanin, *y this &or) *oth the a*o)e o- a ,rou! an) its li-estyle. [n) 8a,e 30% As a consequence the !olitical s!ace &hich &as sha!e) in the ery ,a! *et&een the a*stract literalness o- the ri,hts an) the !ole+ic a*out their eri-ication turns out to )i+inish +ore an) 7 +ore eery )ay. lti+ately those ri,hts a!!ear actually e+!ty. They see+ to *e o- no use. An) &hen they are o- no use you )o the sa+e as charita*le !ersons )o &ith their ol) clothes. Kou ,ie the+ to the !oor. Those ri,hts that a!!ear to *e useless in their !lace are sent a*roa) alon, &ith +e)icine an) clothes to !eo!le )e!rie) o- +e)icine clothes an) ri,hts. 7t is in this &ay as the result o- this !rocess that the Ri,hts o- an *eco+e the ri,hts o- those &ho hae no ri,hts the ri,hts o- *are hu+an *ein,s su*ecte) to inhu+an re!ression an) inhu+an con)itions o- e6istence. They *eco+e hu+anitarian ri,hts the ri,hts o- those &ho cannot enact the+ the icti+s o- the a*solute )enial o- ri,ht. >or all this they are not oi). 8olitical na+es an) !olitical !laces neer *eco+e +erely oi). The oi) is -ille) *y so+e*o)y or so+ethin, else. The Ri,hts o- an )o not *eco+e oi) *y *eco+in, the ri,hts o- those &ho cannot actuali=e the+. 7- they are not truly 5their5 ri,hts they can *eco+e the ri,hts o- others. 5The Ri,hts o- the ?ther5 is the title o- an essay &ritten *y Jean$>ranLois Iyotar) ori,inally a !a!er ,ien &ithin the aus!ices o- the ?6-or) Iectures on the Ri,hts o- an or,ani=e) in 1""3 *y A+nesty 7nternational.14 The the+e o- the ri,hts o- the other has to *e un)erstoo) as an ans&er to the question :hat )o u+an Ri,hts +ean in the conte6t o- the hu+anitarian situation; 7t is !art o- an atte+!t to rethin' ri,hts *y -irst rethin'in, :ron,. The issue o- rethin'in, :ron, increasin,ly too' the -loor a-ter the colla!se o- the Soiet +!ire an) the )isa!!ointin, outco+es o- &hat &as su!!ose) to *e the last ste! to uniersal )e+ocracy. 7n the conte6t o- the ne& out*ursts o- racial or reli,ious hatre) an) iolence it &as no lon,er !ossi*le to assi,n cri+es a,ainst hu+anity to s!eci-ic i)eolo,ies. The cri+es o- )ea) totalitarian re,i+es ha) to *e rethou,ht9 they &ere sai) to *e not so +uch the s!eci-ic e--ects o- !ererse i)eolo,ies an) outla& re,i+es as the +ani-estations o- an in-inite &ron,a &ron, that coul) no lon,er *e conce!tuali=e) &ithin the o!!osition o- )e+ocracy an) anti)e+ocracy o- le,iti+ate state or la&less state *ut &hich a!!eare) as an a*solute eil an unthin'a*le an) unre)ee+a*le eil. Iyotar)@s conce!tuali=ation o- the 7nhu+an is one o- the +ost si,ni-icant e6a+!les o- that a*soluti=ation. Iyotar) )i) in -act s!lit the i)ea o- the inhu+an. 7n his ie& the -or+s o- re!ression an) cruelty or the situations o- )istress that &e call 5inhu+an5 are the consequences o- our *etrayal o- [n) 8a,e 30#%another 7nhu+an &hat &e coul) call a 5,oo)5 7nhu+an. That 7nhu+an is ?therness as such. 7t is the !art in us that &e )o not control. 7t +ay *e *irth an) in-ancy. 7t +ay *e the nconscious. 7t +ay *e the Ia&. 7t +ay *e Do). The 7nhu+an is the irre)uci*le otherness the !art o- the nta+a*le o- 7
&hich the hu+an *ein, is as Iyotar) says the hosta,e or the slae. A*solute eil *e,ins &ith the atte+!t to ta+e the nta+a*le to )eny the situation o- the hosta,e to )is+iss our )e!en)ency on the !o&er o- the 7nhu+an in or)er to *uil) a &orl) that &e coul) +aster entirely.1E Such a )rea+ o- a*solute -ree)o+ &oul) hae *een the )rea+ o- the nli,hten+ent an) o- Reolutionary e+anci!ation. 7t &oul) still *e at &or' in conte+!orary )rea+s o- !er-ect co++unication an) trans!arency. or instance in Iyotar)@s ie& the ri,ht to s!ea' +ust *e i)enti-ie) &ith the )uty o- 5announcin, so+ethin, ne&.51
This is the !hiloso!hical &ay o- un)erstan)in, the ri,hts o- the ?ther.
8
thics is in)ee) on our a,en)as. So+e !eo!le see it as a return to so+e -oun)in, s!irit o- the co++unity sustainin, !ositie la&s an) !olitical a,ency. 7 ta'e a -airly )i--erent ie& o- this ne& rei,n o- ethics. 7t +eans to +e the erasure o- all le,al )istinctions an) the closure o- all !olitical interals o- )issensus. ie Iessons in 7ntellectual +anci!ation The Bi,hts o- Ia*or9 The :or'ers@ Hrea+ in Bineteenth$Fentury >rance The Ba+es o- istory ?n the Shores o- 8olitics Hisa,ree+ent9 8olitics an) 8hiloso!hy Short Moya,es to the Ian) o- the 8eo!le an) +ore recentlyIa >a*le cinN+ato,ra!hique. n)notes 1. )+un) rance e). J. D. A. 8ococ' (7n)iana!olis9 ac'et 1"#. 2. annah Aren)t The ?ri,ins o- Totalitarianis+ (Be& Kor'9 arcourt oucault The istory o- Se6uality Molu+e 19 An 7ntro)uction [The :ill to Gno&% trans. Ro*ert urley (Be& Kor'9 8antheon 1"# an) Society ust ranLois Iyotar) 5The ?ther@s Ri,hts5 in ?n u+an Ri,hts e). S. Shute an) S. urley (Be& Kor'9
9
