Affective Politics: A Sovereign Way of Cultivating and "Caring of the Self"

Yubraj Aryal
{"title":"Affective Politics: A Sovereign Way of Cultivating and \"Caring of the Self\"","authors":"Yubraj Aryal","doi":"10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201161523","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction The question I want to raise here is the following: what form of politics supports an active and sovereign way of cultivating and caring of the self that would not simply be an instantiation of political power but is capable of becoming part of collective organizations without being overpowered by these collectives? It is in this light that I want to show how an affective politics gives us the potential for new subjectivities and new kinds of politics. In my attempt, I am taking a detour to discover the nonsubjective subjectivity beyond the mechanisms of power in order to speak of \"a subject of practices\" of the body that stimulates the active understanding of the sovereign way of cultivating and caring of the self. The new sense of politics that I am exploring here is not an effect of the discursive power relations, which Michel Foucault in his earlier career would advocate for, but it is the fundamental affective force in the emergence of new subjectless subjectivities. The new dimension of politics and its affective relations to subjective emergence are not a cultural relation of power and knowledge but of creative emergence of the self. They refer to the openness to body, openness to participation in self-stylization of body and the self. Affective Politics The affective politics questions a kind of politics with a misleading conception of human beings according to which they are inherently political (mutually agreed to form a consensus for living) and easily capable of articulating their interests rationally to reach to a common goal in life. The traditionalist notion of politics assumes human beings agreed to live together rationally on certain common interests. But affective politics, a new sense of being political or doing politics, adds up another distinct ethos in the human beings according to which they are expected to participate in a creation of new, opening up genuinely new ways of thinking, feeling and action in life. This is what I mean by affective politics. Human beings do not just live together more or less rationally in a given political structure and create shared thoughts, feelings and actions but are capable of creating entirely new values within and beyond the given politics. Certainly becoming a subject is something one cannot do on one's own; it is an intensely social process of shared values. Politics forms our becomings and reciprocally our becomings shape the becoming of politics. The co-dependability of our subjective becoming and becoming sociality is at the heart of the affective politics. So when we study an account of politics, we need to analyse how subjective becoming interfaces with social becoming. What sort of affective process--to affect and to be affected--as an engagement with the world is involved in creating a \"communicative consensus\" upon people's mutual goals and interests? The new modes of thinking, feeling and action occur not at the level of power relations but at the level of the body. Bodily drives first give birth to political power relations. So affective politics focuses unconscious physical processes (creative movements), which are neither analogous to, nor representative, of the power relations to which they give rise. In other words, affective politics as an alternative politics deals with how particular discourses of power relations, for say, class, gender, race etc., emerge into being as an affective force; how that process becomes political (creation of novelty) binding our individuality with social politics. The discourse of power relations is neither personal nor biological; it is a set of affective forces compounded in us from outside and inside of life. (1) So, politics exists at the level of force, not at the level of representation of ideology and power. Politics is not interpreting the given in the form of the personal or biological, but creating a space for the newer impulse, newer compounds of forces \"yet to come. …","PeriodicalId":288505,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Philosophy: A Cross-Disciplinary Inquiry","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/JPHILNEPAL201161523","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction The question I want to raise here is the following: what form of politics supports an active and sovereign way of cultivating and caring of the self that would not simply be an instantiation of political power but is capable of becoming part of collective organizations without being overpowered by these collectives? It is in this light that I want to show how an affective politics gives us the potential for new subjectivities and new kinds of politics. In my attempt, I am taking a detour to discover the nonsubjective subjectivity beyond the mechanisms of power in order to speak of "a subject of practices" of the body that stimulates the active understanding of the sovereign way of cultivating and caring of the self. The new sense of politics that I am exploring here is not an effect of the discursive power relations, which Michel Foucault in his earlier career would advocate for, but it is the fundamental affective force in the emergence of new subjectless subjectivities. The new dimension of politics and its affective relations to subjective emergence are not a cultural relation of power and knowledge but of creative emergence of the self. They refer to the openness to body, openness to participation in self-stylization of body and the self. Affective Politics The affective politics questions a kind of politics with a misleading conception of human beings according to which they are inherently political (mutually agreed to form a consensus for living) and easily capable of articulating their interests rationally to reach to a common goal in life. The traditionalist notion of politics assumes human beings agreed to live together rationally on certain common interests. But affective politics, a new sense of being political or doing politics, adds up another distinct ethos in the human beings according to which they are expected to participate in a creation of new, opening up genuinely new ways of thinking, feeling and action in life. This is what I mean by affective politics. Human beings do not just live together more or less rationally in a given political structure and create shared thoughts, feelings and actions but are capable of creating entirely new values within and beyond the given politics. Certainly becoming a subject is something one cannot do on one's own; it is an intensely social process of shared values. Politics forms our becomings and reciprocally our becomings shape the becoming of politics. The co-dependability of our subjective becoming and becoming sociality is at the heart of the affective politics. So when we study an account of politics, we need to analyse how subjective becoming interfaces with social becoming. What sort of affective process--to affect and to be affected--as an engagement with the world is involved in creating a "communicative consensus" upon people's mutual goals and interests? The new modes of thinking, feeling and action occur not at the level of power relations but at the level of the body. Bodily drives first give birth to political power relations. So affective politics focuses unconscious physical processes (creative movements), which are neither analogous to, nor representative, of the power relations to which they give rise. In other words, affective politics as an alternative politics deals with how particular discourses of power relations, for say, class, gender, race etc., emerge into being as an affective force; how that process becomes political (creation of novelty) binding our individuality with social politics. The discourse of power relations is neither personal nor biological; it is a set of affective forces compounded in us from outside and inside of life. (1) So, politics exists at the level of force, not at the level of representation of ideology and power. Politics is not interpreting the given in the form of the personal or biological, but creating a space for the newer impulse, newer compounds of forces "yet to come. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
情感政治:修身养性与“自我关怀”的主道
我想在这里提出的问题是:什么样的政治形式支持一种积极的、自主的培养和关心自我的方式,这种方式不仅是政治权力的一个实例,而且能够成为集体组织的一部分,而不被这些集体所压倒?正是在这种情况下,我想展示情感政治如何给我们带来新的主体性和新的政治类型的潜力。在我的尝试中,我绕道去发现超越权力机制的非主观主体性,以便谈论身体的“实践主体”,它激发了对培养和照顾自我的主权方式的积极理解。我在这里探索的新的政治意识并不是话语权力关系的结果,这是米歇尔·福柯在他早期的职业生涯中所提倡的,但它是新的无主体主体性出现的基本情感力量。政治的新维度及其与主观出现的情感关系不是权力和知识的文化关系,而是自我的创造性出现。它们指的是对身体的开放,对参与身体和自我的自我风格化的开放。情感政治质疑的是一种政治,这种政治带有一种对人类的误导性观念,根据这种观念,人类本质上是政治性的(相互同意形成一种生活共识),并且很容易能够理性地表达他们的利益,以达到共同的生活目标。传统主义的政治观念假定人类同意基于某些共同利益理性地生活在一起。但是情感政治,一种新的政治或政治行为意识,在人类中形成了另一种独特的精神,根据这种精神,人们被期望参与到一种新的创造中,在生活中开辟真正新的思维,感觉和行动方式。这就是我所说的情感政治。人类不仅在特定的政治结构中或多或少地理性地生活在一起,创造共同的思想、感情和行动,而且能够在特定的政治内外创造全新的价值观。当然,一个人不能独自成为一个主体;这是一个共同价值观的强烈的社会过程。政治形成了我们的形成,反过来,我们的形成又塑造了政治的形成。我们的主观成为和成为社会性的相互依赖性是情感政治的核心。所以当我们研究政治的时候,我们需要分析主观的形成是如何与社会的形成相联系的。什么样的情感过程——影响和被影响——作为一种与世界的接触,在人们的共同目标和利益上创造了一种“沟通共识”?新的思维、感觉和行动模式不是发生在权力关系层面,而是发生在身体层面。身体的驱力首先产生了政治权力关系。因此,情感政治关注的是无意识的物理过程(创造性运动),这些过程既不类似于也不代表它们所产生的权力关系。换句话说,情感政治作为一种替代政治处理的是权力关系的特定话语,例如阶级,性别,种族等,如何成为一种情感力量;这个过程如何变成政治的(新奇的创造)将我们的个性与社会政治捆绑在一起。权力关系的论述既不是个人的,也不是生物的;它是我们生活中外在和内在的一系列情感力量。(1)因此,政治存在于武力层面,而不是意识形态和权力的代表层面。政治不是用个人的或生物的形式来解释给定的东西,而是为新的冲动创造一个空间,为“尚未到来的”新的力量组合创造一个空间。…
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 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Emily Dickinson: What Is Called Thinking at the Edge of Chaos? Relational Selves: Gender and Cultural Differences in Moral Reasoning Late Pound: The Case of Canto CVII The Reproduction of Subjectivity and the Turnover-time of Ideology: Speculating with German Idealism, Marx, and Adorno Toward an Ethics of Speculative Design
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1