Reproducing the Conqueror’s South Africa: An Azanian Critique of the Constitutionalist Endorsement of Assisted Reproductive and Reprogenetic Technologies

IF 0.7 0 PHILOSOPHY Phronimon Pub Date : 2024-02-23 DOI:10.25159/2413-3086/14906
Ilana Le Roux
{"title":"Reproducing the Conqueror’s South Africa: An Azanian Critique of the Constitutionalist Endorsement of Assisted Reproductive and Reprogenetic Technologies","authors":"Ilana Le Roux","doi":"10.25159/2413-3086/14906","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Discussions on the use, regulation, and development of assisted reproductive and reprogenetic technologies are dominated by rights discourse, primarily paying attention to how these technologies can give effect to or violate individual or group rights within the current liberal human rights framework. South Africa has played a prominent role as Africa’s representative in this global discussion pertaining to the ethics of genetic and reproductive technologies; undoubtedly attributable to it having what is described by many as “one of the most progressive constitutions in the world.” One popular perspective presupposing the legitimacy of the 1996 constitution and prevailing human rights norms, argues for the relaxation of restrictions on these technologies to allow for the effective exercise and realisation of constitutionally protected rights. In this article I explore the use of these technologies from a constitutional abolitionist perspective espoused by the Azanian Philosophical Tradition. By understanding the 1996 constitution as the constitutionalisation of conquest, I contemplate the ways in which these technologies function in service of (global) white supremacy and settler domination in conqueror South Africa. The article argues that in a world ordered by bio-logic, these technologies effectively (re)produce the society envisioned by the conqueror; begging the question as to whether these technologies can indeed be used in service of a post-conquest South Africa.","PeriodicalId":42048,"journal":{"name":"Phronimon","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Phronimon","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25159/2413-3086/14906","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Discussions on the use, regulation, and development of assisted reproductive and reprogenetic technologies are dominated by rights discourse, primarily paying attention to how these technologies can give effect to or violate individual or group rights within the current liberal human rights framework. South Africa has played a prominent role as Africa’s representative in this global discussion pertaining to the ethics of genetic and reproductive technologies; undoubtedly attributable to it having what is described by many as “one of the most progressive constitutions in the world.” One popular perspective presupposing the legitimacy of the 1996 constitution and prevailing human rights norms, argues for the relaxation of restrictions on these technologies to allow for the effective exercise and realisation of constitutionally protected rights. In this article I explore the use of these technologies from a constitutional abolitionist perspective espoused by the Azanian Philosophical Tradition. By understanding the 1996 constitution as the constitutionalisation of conquest, I contemplate the ways in which these technologies function in service of (global) white supremacy and settler domination in conqueror South Africa. The article argues that in a world ordered by bio-logic, these technologies effectively (re)produce the society envisioned by the conqueror; begging the question as to whether these technologies can indeed be used in service of a post-conquest South Africa.
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
复制征服者的南非:阿扎尼亚人对辅助生殖和再生育技术的立宪主义批判
关于辅助生殖技术和生殖基因技术的使用、监管和发展的讨论以权利讨论为主,主要关注这些技术如何在当前的自由人权框架内实现或侵犯个人或群体的权利。在有关基因和生殖技术伦理的全球讨论中,南非作为非洲的代表发挥了突出作用;这无疑归功于南非拥有被许多人称为 "世界上最进步的宪法之一"。一种流行的观点以 1996 年宪法和现行人权准则的合法性为前提,主张放宽对这些技术的限制,以便有效行使和实现受宪法保护的权利。在本文中,我将从阿扎尼亚哲学传统(Azanian Philosophical Tradition)所支持的宪法废除主义角度探讨这些技术的使用。通过将 1996 年宪法理解为征服的宪法化,我思考了这些技术在征服者南非服务于(全球)白人至上主义和定居者统治的方式。文章认为,在一个以生物逻辑为秩序的世界中,这些技术有效地(重新)生产了征服者所设想的社会;这就提出了一个问题,即这些技术是否真的可以用于征服后的南非。
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
Phronimon
Phronimon PHILOSOPHY-
自引率
25.00%
发文量
5
期刊最新文献
Environmental Racism in Nigeria’s Niger Delta: An Ethical Appraisal Copyright Law and the Ruse of Culture: ‘Traditional Cultural Expressions and Expressions of Folklore’ as a Conception of Racial Difference Reproducing the Conqueror’s South Africa: An Azanian Critique of the Constitutionalist Endorsement of Assisted Reproductive and Reprogenetic Technologies The Evolution of Constitutionalism in Conqueror South Africa. Was Jan Smuts Right? An Ubu-ntu Response Who Must Lead Decoloniality: A Practical Theological Interrogation on the Possible Qualification to Lead Decolonisation: A South African Study
×
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