Saul Newman

Postanarchism and space: Revolutionary fantasies and autonomous zones

In this paper, I call for a re-consideration of anarchism and its alternative ways of conceptualising spaces for radical politics. Here I apply a Lacanian analysis of the social imaginary to explore the utopian fantasies and desires that underpin social spaces, discourses and practices – including planning, and revolutionary politics. I will go on to develop – via Castoriadis and others – a distinctly post-anarchist conception of political space based around the project of autonomy and the re-situation of the political space outside the state. This will have direct consequences for an alternative conception of planning practice and theory.

‘Agamben, Arendt and Human Rights: Bearing Witness to the Human’

The key theme in this essay is the rethinking of the human, as inspired by the work of Giorgio Agamben and Hannah Arendt. The human here is not a model or concept to be realised, just as community to which the human is linked is not an ideal, but a ‘community to come’. This is revealed only by paying close attention to modes of bearing witness to the human, as instanced, for example, by Agamben’s text, Remnants of Auschwitz. Current notions of political community and the human thus need to be reassessed. Only by doing this will it be possible to address the crucial issues that currently confront human rights—issues such as the tension between the principle of universal human rights and that of state sovereignty, the growing problem of statelessness, and the reduction of human rights to biopolitical humanitarianism.

The Place of Power in Political Discourse

This article examines the concept of a central, symbolic place of power in political theory. I trace the genealogy of “place” from sovereign conceptions of power in classical political theory to the problem of state power in radical politics. I then examine the theoretical and political implications of Foucault’s reconfiguration of the concept of power, in particular, his contention that power does not have a place, but rather, is dispersed throughout the social network. I argue that this decentralization of the concept of power denies a universal dimension that “sutures” the political field. I critically engage with the limitations and flaws of Foucault’s theory of power, and turn to the work of Lefort and Laclau for a more viable understanding of the relationship between power, its place or non-place, and the contemporary possibilities for radical politics.

Agamben and the politics of human rights : statelessness, images, violence

Human rights today have become the meta-narrative of globalisation. However, the most casual glance reveals a world in which human rights are violated on an unprecedented scale, often by the very sovereign states who claim to promote them. This is no coincidence, according to Giorgio Agamben, who argues that despite the claims of NGOs, international legal scholars, global ethicists and governments, human rights today do not protect us from the excesses of state power, but, on the contrary, are a sign of our growing powerlessness and political alienation in the face of a sovereign state of exception that has become global. In this book, we take Agamben’s critique as our starting point and reveal the paradoxes central to the politics of human rights by exploring questions of statelessness, exclusion, the violence of securitization and the visual representation of refugees and illegal migrants in the media. Here we propose a radical rethinking of human rights. Human rights must be disengaged from humanitarianism, biopolitics, sovereignty and the society of the spectacle - they must become genuinely political.

Politics most unusual: Violence, sovereignty and democracy in the 'war on terror'

How has September 11 and the declaration of the ‘global war on terror’ changed our conceptions of politics? How has it affected our understanding of democracy, human rights, personal freedom and government accountability? How should we respond in the face of growing violence and authoritarianism? In answering these questions, the authors engage in a comprehensive and critical analysis of politics in the age of terrorism. They explore different dimensions of a new political paradigm that has started to emerge in our societies, one characterized by an obsession with security, a loss of civil liberties and democratic transparency, government lies and cover-ups, the intrusion of religion into the public sphere, and an increasingly violent and militaristic foreign policy. In attempting to make sense of these developments, Politics Most Unusual examines a series of political, moral and psychological questions which are central to explaining politics in the age of terror.

Postanarchism: a politics of anti-politics

This article outlines a politics of postanarchism, which is based on a radical renewal—via poststructuralist theory—of classical anarchisms critique of statism and authority and its political ethics of egalibertarianism. I contend that while many of the theoretical categories of classical anarchism continue to be relevant today—and indeed are becoming more relevant with the collapse of competing radical projects and what might be seen as a paradigm shift from the representative politics of the party and vanguard to that of movements and decentralized networks—its humanist and rationalist epistemological framework needs to be rethought in the light of poststructuralist and postmodern theories. Here I develop an alternative understanding of anarchism based on a non-essentialist politics of autonomy.

What is an Insurrection? Destituent Power and Ontological Anarchy in Agamben and Stirner:

The aim of this article is to develop a theoretical understanding of the insurrection as a central concept in radical politics in order to account for contemporary movements and forms of mobilisation that seek to withdraw from governing institutions and affirm autonomous practices and forms of life. I will develop a theory of insurrection by investigating the parallel thinking of Giorgio Agamben and Max Stirner. Starting with Stirner’s central distinction between revolution and insurrection, and linking this with Agamben’s theory of destituent power, I show how both thinkers develop an ontologically anarchic approach to ethics, subjectivity and life that is designed to destitute and profane governing institutions and established categories of politics. However, I will argue that Stirner’s ‘egoistic’ and voluntarist approach to insurrection provides a more tangible and positive way of thinking about political action and agency than Agamben’s at times vague, albeit suggestive, notion of inoperativity.

Sacred Cows and the Changing Face of Discourse on Terrorism: Cranking it Up a Notch

ABSTRACT Ethicists working in either ‘just war’ and/or ‘human rights’ traditions continue to be embroiled with the definition of terrorism and the question of whether terrorism can ever be morally justified; obsessed with non-combatant immunity and criteria for distinguishing combatants from non-combatants; and examining ‘the doctrine of double effect’. The move to other issues has, however, been embraced by those who initiated it since 9/11, those with new ideas and analyses that draw from many disciplines. We will discuss why philosophical/political discussion about terrorism has taken a turn away from questions like ‘can terrorism can be morally justified’ and efforts to define terrorism. Discourse on terrorism, much of it extra-philosophical, has taken a turn for the better. It is increasingly concerned with issues about the nature of terrorism rather than its definition; the nature of the discourse itself about terrorism, and what this tells us about terrorism; and the causes of terrorism – the examination of which is subverted by the discourse on terrorism.

Postanarchism and power

This article develops a postanarchist conception of power by using Foucault to reveal some of the tensions and limitations within classical anarchist theory. As a Foucauldian poststructuralist analysis shows, the operation of power is more complex and constitutive than was allowed in classical anarchist theory, which tended to focus on state sovereignty. The revealing of the pervasiveness of power makes problematic any sort of ontological separation between society and power. However, rather than this insight undermining the possibility of anarchism – a form of radical politics that I argue is becoming more relevant today – it necessitates a certain modification of classical anarchism into postanarchism. Postanarchism might be seen as a new way of thinking about a politics of autonomy based on practices of freedom.

American Empire and its Discontents

In the last chapter we explored the state of exception in terms of its implications for domestic politics. The moment of exception referred to the way that the sovereign defines a state of emergency and decides unilaterally on how to respond to it, suspending the legal framework which would otherwise limit it. The state of exception is therefore a crystallization of the power of the state, a strange no-man’s-land beyond the law in which the sovereign can act with violent impunity. We found that this situation applies increasingly to political life in contemporary Western societies, societies which define themselves as formally liberal and democratic but which implement ‘security’ measures that are more akin to those of authoritarian police states.