by Lance Bradley
Professor Achille Mbembe, a political scientist famous for his research in necropolitics, defined the term in 2019 as a “unique form of social existence in which vast populations are subjected to the status of the living dead”. Unfortunately, this relatively modern research focuses on necropolitics is not only related to historical empires but is increasingly relevant to our modern world.
Following WWII, many countries were interested in reducing violence and aggressiveness in politics and society.
Following WWII, many countries were interested in reducing violence and aggressiveness in politics and society. This included getting rid of domestic politics that stripped citizens down to a form of “living death”, as it’s called in necropolitical research, in which they no longer have sovereignty over their own bodies. The USSR closed gulags, the European Community helped restore peace to Europe, civil rights activists fought to end racial violence, and anti-war and anti-fascist movements grew worldwide. Extreme violence still took place despite broad acceptance of these norms, but the shock and disgust around such events lead to action against violent actors and solidarity with victims. This is thanks to media, particularly television, which brought global news into the living rooms of families all over the world. But beyond media, many shared the conscious goal of establishing the antithesis to global fascism that led to the political, social, or literal death of millions – an end to necropolitics.
Democratic peace theory was born during this period, de-colonization raced through Africa, and most states made advancements in peace and democracy benchmarks. Practically, necropolitics was coming to an end. This world order created with norms, values, international law, regulations on war, emphasis on human rights, and acute interest in global policing and justice significantly formed this pacifist, caring generation that made the world more livable. This ideal so-called ‘liberal World Order’, figure-headed by Martin Luther King Jr., Lech Wałęsa, and Desmond Tutu, is slowly dying.
Since the turn of the century, it seems that global society reverted to realist political thought, war, nationalism, and egoism.
Since the turn of the century, it seems that global society reverted to realist political thought, war, nationalism, and egoism. Russia’s domestic and international terror, America’s police violence, China’s ethnic cleansing, Taliban rule in Afghanistan, the EU’s bloody border, etc. All over, democracy is decreasing, inequality increasing, and nationalism is becoming mainstream. Many new nationalist governments have either already begun violently silencing opposition and minorities, removing the rights of those “less valuable to their necroeconomy”.
How can the generation raised by anti-war hippies and democratic trailblazers be inclined to nationalism and indifferent toward violence?
Necropolitics is back, but why? How can the generation raised by anti-war hippies and democratic trailblazers be inclined to nationalism and indifferent toward violence? Media reports on atrocities used to outrage people, now the omnipresence of such reports desensitizes. The constant bombardment of news on conflict, hunger, inequality, despair, and the climate crisis hardened younger generations, creating a deaf ear listening to the multiple cries for help. Ironically, another reason is the success of the older generation in sheltering younger generations from the terrors of war. Particularly for people from Western Europe or the Americas, war is something from movies or novels, but there is a detachment to the suffering war causes. This ignorance of the horrors of war has, perhaps, increased support for nationalism, authoritarianism, and new bloody wars. Necropolitics is back, and necropolitical researchers have warned us of its consequences. History may be bound to repeat itself, but can this evil be stopped in its tracks?
Lance Bradley is a soon-to-graduate Master’s student of International Relations and Regional Studies at the University of Tartu. Lance’s research interests focus on foreign and security policy as well as European integration in Moldova, Ukraine, and Georgia. He also has a special interest in Russian relations to de facto states in Eastern Europe. His Master’s thesis is a study of state-building in the Donbas from 2014-2021. Professionally, Lance is interested in humanitarian aid and development in Eastern Europe.
This blog is a part of a blog series written by the BAMSE Tartu intensive course students. The blog series analyses the impact of crises on the politics of history, challenges of democracy, biopolitics and energy security. This blog is belongs to the biopolitics part of the blog series. Read more about the blog series on Bamse News & Events website.