Who is the subject of neoliberal rights? Governmentality, subjectification and the letter of the law

Abstract

Motivated by the litigious politics of the South African shack-dwellers' movement, Abahlali baseMjondolo, this paper enquires into the knowledge dynamics implied by the governmentality literature's take on the (neo)liberal deployment of (human) rights. It suggests that by implicitly constructing the freedom of codified rights as illusionary and opposed to the reality of neoliberal rationalities of government, this scholarship posits a cognitive hierarchy between agents of government and the governed, and thus reproduces the power dynamics that it seeks to criticise. Interweaving a presentation of Abahlali's selfarticulation as knowledgeable and rightful subjects with Jacques Rancière's notion of 'literariness', the paper accounts for codified rights' potential to enable the disruption of such dynamics, and traces the governmentality literature's suspicion towards this potential back to its textual methodology.

The South African TRC as Neoliberal Reconciliation: Victim Subjectivities and the Synchronization of Affects

“…Odysseos’ work is notable insofar as it shows the ways in which human rights ‘actively’ supports neoliberalism through the production of subjectivity. This approach has been critically developed by other authors to examine the political work of South African shack-dwellers (Selmeczi, 2015) and the neoliberal function of indigenous rights (Lindroth, 2014).…”

O domínio humanitário de paz contemporâneo

“…There is also a scholarship that draws on Foucault's concept of governmentality 6 in order to assess current transformations on humanitarian international practices and to capture how a contemporary humanitarian rationality is governing precarious conditions (FASSIN 2011;DUFFIELD, 2012;SELMECZI 2015;SOKHI-BULLEY 2011;NGUYEN 2010). Duffield (2012), more specifically, focuses on the link between humanitarianism and liberal development, shedding light on the notions of free market, democracy and intervention.…”

“…Homo juridicus is, as well, self-governed, with eager to emancipate and sees itself as agent of social transformation. As pointed out by Selmeczi, "subjects of government are fabricated through 'technologies of citizenship', such as the ethos of active citizenship or the notion of empowerment" (SELMECZI, 2015(SELMECZI, , p. 1078. The type of transformation homo juridicus exerts, however, is oriented by humanitarian discourses, which means that the leverage to act is limited to matters of "cultural self-determination", "individual freedom" or "development as freedom", whereas its possibility to engage in more radical actions of social transformation is suppressed -like redistribution of wealth and land or agricultural reform.…”

“…As mentioned before, we do not deny the possibilities of counter conduct as resistance (ethical reconfigurations of power). For an example on how the South-african shack-dwellers movement Abahlali baseMjondolo resists this rationality of "governing through freedom" or "governing through rights", see AnnaSelmeczi (2015).…”