We use cookies to store your preferred colour choice and to collect site statistics. For more information about cookies and how we handle user data please consult our privacy policy.


Warning: preg_match(): Allocation of JIT memory failed, PCRE JIT will be disabled. This is likely caused by security restrictions. Either grant PHP permission to allocate executable memory, or set pcre.jit=0 in /home/easa/easaonline.org/networks/anthromob/mailbox-widget/mailbox-widget.php on line 163
Message posted on 12/11/2019

CLARIFICATION CfP on Identity- and Alterity-Politics

Dear all, here is a CfP regarding identity- and the rarely elaborated counterconcept of alterity-politics. The panel, in which the paper is to be presented, will be part of the interdisciplinary conference: B/ORDERING CULTURES: Everyday Life, Politics, Aesthetics at the European University Viadrina /Frankfurt Oder/Germany. Deadline: 01.12.2019 Conference-Schedule: 08.-10.10.2020 Please feel free to share. All the best, Felix

CfP: B/ORDERING CULTURES: Everyday Life, Politics, Aesthetics https://www.borders-in-motion.de/kwg-jahrestagung-2020 =C2=A0 Panel: Alterity-Politics Between and Beyond Identity-Political B/Orders =C2=A0 Political orders in the nexus of neoliberal capitalism and nation-state-governmentality are first of all defined by various forms of identity-politics in the widest sense of the concept. Identity politics has an epistemic character in the=C2=A0 foucauldian sense: Betwe= en and beyond the logics of identification and respectively bordering and boundary-drawing, the political as a distinct sphere of human agency seems almost unconceivable, today.=C2=A0 Aggressive Identitarianism can always be practiced one-sidedly, by more or less privileged boundary-drawing and depoliticised fighting against difference and diversity. Defensively emancipative identity-politics=C2=A0=

can=C2=A0 always=C2=A0 be=C2=A0 practiced=C2=A0 one-sidedly=C2=A0 as=C2=A0= well,=C2=A0 by=C2=A0 necessary=C2=A0 boundary-drawing=C2=A0 and=C2=A0 political fighting =E2=80=93 but then in= evitably competing with other deprivileged identities for socio-cultural recognition and public visibility. More or less clearly defined identifications follow a practical logic of ordering the social and cultural along horizontal segregations as well as vertical stratifications. Normative aims of equality are constantly effaced by one-sided practices of structural competition and political combat. Alterity-politics by contrast is practically based in mutual responsibility, ethical commitment and dialogue with conflicting identifications, where solidarity beyond identity-related loyalty arises. It requires a voluntary and mutual questioning of socio-cultural identifications, privileges and power-relations. It is a process of political, practical, affective as well as aesthetic and cognitive debordering, creating new common ground, creating new, open and hybrid alterities beyond the conventional logics of identity-related boundary-maintenance.=C2=A0 Alterity-politics is a mode of the political in diametric opposition to the practically one-sided logics of identitarian politics, with the fundamental weakness in practice, that it cannot be practiced least enforced one-sidedly, but only accomplished in mutual agreement. The panel features contributions circling around the political, social, cultural, affective, aesthetic and cognitive practices and practical logics of b/ordering identities in view of de- and reordering the political by means of practices, that can be associated with alterity-politics in a wider sense. Regarding all-pervasive combat and competition, it is necessary to acknowledge that identity-politics cannot be over-come by peaceful debordering practices alone, due to its one-sided character, and thus remains often inevitable, especially in defensively emancipative struggles. Thus, the panel focuses on the practical limitations of both =E2=80=93 identity- and alterity-politics: = Where do alterity-politics become possible? Where do identity-politics become necessary? How to overcome the pitfalls of identity-politics =E2=80=93 wh= en identity-politics becomes identitarian? =C2=A0 Nealon, Jeffrey T. (1998): Alterity politics. Ethics and performative subjectivity. Durham, NC: Duke Univ. Press. Yuval-Davis, Nira (2010): Theorizing identity: Beyond the 'us' and 'them' dichotomy. In: Patterns of Prejudice 44 (3), S. 261=E2=80=93280. Hoffmann, Felix (2019): Anti-Rassismus zwischen Identit=C3=A4ts- und Alterit=C3=A4tspolitik. Ein praxislogischer Ann=C3=A4he- rungsversuch. In: Heidrun Friese, Marcus Nolden und Miriam Schreiter (Hg.): Alltagsrassismus. Theoretische und empirische Perspektiven nach Chemnitz. Bielefeld: Transcript. =C2=A0 =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 The CfP addresses researchers as well as master and PhD-s= tudents from all disciplines, who see themselves as part of cultural studies in a wider sense.=C2=A0 =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 Please hand in an abstract of 300-500 words plus a short = literature list=C2=A0 =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 Abstracts as well as presentations should focus on a cohe= rent and consistent line of argumen- tation regarding contents, getting down to the point(s) you want to make. Please evade lengthy introductions of the state of the art or project-histories =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 Deadline: 1 st=C2=A0 of December 2019=C2=A0 =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 to f.hoffmann@fu-berlin.de. =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 The panel language will be English =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 Presentation-time will be 15 min. max. and 15 min. for di= scussion =E2=80=A2=C2=A0 For contributors from abroad, we will=C2=A0 make every ef= fort to provide (partial) travel cost support for foreign participants.

Dr. Felix Hoffmann Cultural- and Social Anthropologist Technische Universit=C3=A4t Chemnitz

view as plain text