Sirvi Märksõna "biopoliitika" järgi

Nüüd näidatakse 1 - 11 11

listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Beyond Geopolitics: Russian Soft Power, Conservatism, and Biopolitics
(Brill’s publications, 2018) Makarychev, Andrey
This article offers a new approach to Russian foreign policy under Putin’s presidency as shifting from its ‘soft power’ model to what might be characterized through the prism of biopower. The author discusses the various meanings attached to the concept of attraction, and scrutinises the biopolitical turn in Russia as a domestic phenomenon and as a key element of Russia’s power projection abroad. It is argued that biopolitics as a power instrument can play different roles – it can be a tool to construct Russian national (and simultaneously imperial) identity and to distinguish Russia from the West, and channel for communication with conservative forces across the globe.
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Biopolitical art and the struggle for Sovereignty in Putin’s Russia. Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern
(Routledge, 2019) Makarychev, Andrey; Medvedev, Sergey
This article addresses the public appeal of political actionism in today’s Russia through analysis of the political art of Pyotr Pavlensky. The research uses the methodological paradigm of biopower and biopolitics, as outlined by Michel Foucault and further critically developed by Giorgio Agamben, since it helps to better understand both the oppressive nature of the Russian state, and the protest art of Pavlensky. The article seeks to unpack the struggle for the human body that has started in Russia in recent years, with the state imposing its normalizing and regulatory mechanisms upon private lives and corporeal practices of individuals, and people’s responses by re-claiming their bodies, from an open public discussion of sexuality, domestic violence and gender equality, to the radical exposure of the body by artists like Pavlensky. As the argument goes, the centerpiece of political controversy is not just the battle for the human body, but a battle for sovereignty, defining the limits of state intervention, the borders of the political community and the rights of the individual. The article asks a number of questions: how Pavlensky’s performances can be explained within the framework of the biopolitical regime of Putin’s rule? Whether Pavlensky’s use of his own body for political purposes (a “biopolitical art’ of sorts) is a response to the increased biopolitical intervention of the Russian state that has marked Putin’s third term in office? Why did political protest become corporeal? How does the individual body turn into a tool for political contestation and how does it embody collective meanings? How the politicization of the body transpires, and how an individual body can incarnate a collective body of nation?
listelement.badge.access-status Avatud juurdepääs ,
Biopolitical conservatism and “pastoral power”: a Russia – Georgia meeting point.
(Tbilisi: Georgian Institute of Politics., 2017) Makarychev, Andrey
The paper applies the concept of biopolitics to the analysis of Russia's relations with Georgia. It highlights the centrality of Orthodoxy for Russia's "soft power" and religious diplomacy.
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Biopolitics and national identities: between liberalism and totalization
(Routledge, 2017) Makarychev, Andrey
This is an introductory article to the special cluster on the biopolitical reading of nation-building in post-Soviet countries. The authors explain the advatnages of using the biopolitical approach to countries with hybrid identities, and discuss the totalizing potential of biopolitical narratives
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Biopolitics and Russian Studies: An Introduction
(Brill’s publications, 2018) Makarychev, Andrey
This introductory article explains how the concept of biopolitics can be used as an analytical tool in the sphere of Russian studies. The author elucidates different approaches to the idea of biopolitics in contemporary political philosophy, and relates the extant theoretical debate to the ongoing political and academic discussions on power and identity in Russia, both from domestic and international perspectives. He claims that biopolitical vocabulary is a nuanced cognitive instrument for unpacking a plethora of social and cultural dimensions inherent to relations of power, and further conceptualizing the specificity of post-Soviet illiberal regimes.
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Biopower and Geopolitics as Russia's neighbourhood strategies: reconnecting people or reaggregating lands?
(Routledge, 2017) Makarychev, Andrey
In this article, we address geopolitics and biopower as two different yet mutually correlative discursive strategies of sovereign power in Russia. We challenge the dominant realist approaches to Russia’s neighborhood policy by introducing the concept of biopolitics as its key element, which makes analysis of political relations in the post-Soviet area more nuanced and variegated. More specifically, we address an important distinction between geopolitical control over territories and management of population as two of Russia’s strategies in its “near abroad.”
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
Biopower at Europe’s eastern margins: new facets of a research agenda
(Routledge, 2019) Makarychev, Andrey
This special issue seeks to explore the perspectives of applying the different modalities of biopolitical analysis to four country-based case studies at Europe’s eastern margins. The ambition of this collection is to examine issues pertaining to national political, social and cultural agendas through the prism of biopolitical theorizing as broadly understood. This issue offers a specific examination of the applicability of the concept of biopolitics to research in Central Europe, Russia, and the Caucasus.
listelement.badge.access-status Avatud juurdepääs ,
On biopolitical subjectivity: Michel Foucaultʼs perspective on biopolitics and its semiotic aspects
(2018-10-30) Puumeister, Ott; Ventsel, Andreas, juhendaja; Monticelli, Daniele, juhendaja; Tartu Ülikool. Humanitaarteaduste ja kunstide valdkond
Kuidas suhestuvad omavahel eluprotsessid ja tähendusloome? Biosemiootilisest vaatenurgast lähtudes võib elu määratleda semioosi alusel. Elutus maailmas tähendust ei eksisteeri. Tähenduste maailma ning elusa sfääri kokkulangevus muudab üllatavaks asjaolu, et biopoliitika ja biovõimu mõisteid on semiootikas niivõrd vähe käsitletud. Ometi on Michel Foucault' – nende mõistete kasutuselevõtja – üldisem võimukäsitlus poliitilise semiootika arengu oluliseks mõjutajaks. Doktoritöö eesmärgiks on uurida biopoliitika ja semiootika võimalikke ühenduspunkte. Sobivaimaks vaatepunktiks selle täitmiseks on Michel Foucault' oma. Tema arusaam biopoliitikast kui normalisatsiooni alusel toimivast valitsemisloogikast annab võimaluse tõlgendada elu haaramist võimu dispositiividesse või -aparaatidesse subjektide konstrueerimisena. See tähendab, biopoliitilises valitsemises konstrueeritakse normaliseeritud ning normaliseeritavat subjektsust. Aktiivne subjektivatsioon – eneseloome – toimub vastusena juba eksisteerivatele ja normaliseeritud subjektipositsioonidele. Normid on aga alati semiootilised vahendused, normide loomine on märgiline protsess. Normaliseeritud subjektsuse (subjektistamine) ja aktiivse eneseloome (subjektivatsioon) vahelist dialektilist suhet ei tohiks taandada ühele või teisele poolusele. Mõlemad protsessid on olulised, mõistmaks biopoliitikat just nimelt poliitikana, teisisõnu, protsessina, mille käigus konstrueeritakse ühiskondlikke suhteid ning olemisviise ning milles vastupanu on võimalik. Elu haaramine võimu dispositiividesse, või selle töö tõlgenduse alusel, inimeste kui elusolendite omailmade struktureerimine, on poliitiline protsess, mitte lihtne ühepoolne modifitseerimine või vägivallasuhe. Selline arusaam võimaldab meil biopoliitikast semiootilistes terminites kõnelda. Ometi ei tohiks (bio)semiootikat käsitleda kõikvõimsa kontseptuaalse vahendina, mille alusel oleks võimalik elu ja poliitika omavaheliste suhete täielik äraseletamine. Ehkki (bio)semiootilised mõisted nagu semiootiline lävi ja omailm on nii mõnestki aspektist kasulik ja vajalikud, võivad nad mõnikord ise olla kaasatud elu politiseerimisse. Mistõttu on kasulik igat elust kõnelevat teadust vaadelda ka biopoliitika-analüüsi kriitilisest perspektiivist.
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
The biopolitical turn in post-ideological times: a trajectory of Russian transformation
(Tartu: University of Tartu Press, 2017) Makarychev, Andrey
The authors study the applicability of the concept of biopolitics to contemporary Russian society and the ruling regime. The article singles our several domains of biopower that play major roles in defining the nature of Russian political regime
listelement.badge.access-status Embargo ,
The Biopolitics of International Exchange: International Educational Exchange Programs – Facilitator or Victim in the Battle for Biopolitical Normativity?
(Russian Politics, 2018) Erbsen, Heidi
This article addresses how international educational exchange programs are increasingly used as political, and particularly bio-political, tools to promote ideologies of biological normativity. Such programs have historically been promoted by national and international institutions as means to increase participants (and therefore the sending institution’s) knowledge of the world and transfer favorable values through individuals. US and EU exchange programs with Russia in particular have been focused on achieving a ‘mutual understanding’ or promoting ‘common’ or ‘shared values’ across countries; however, a tendency of educational institutions to select like-minded individuals and countries for participation has arguably complicated rather than mended global divides. The difference in values associated with biological practices in Russia, the US, and the EU related to traditional gender roles, marriage, nuclear families, birth control, etc. have become more apparent with the spread of information and globalization.The main argument of this work supports that attention to the promotion or cancelation of certain exchange programs can be used to better understand larger patterns in international relations and the modern system of global governance. An investigation into the founding ideologies behind programs such as FLEX and Fulbright (by the US) and Erasmus + (by the European Commission) and their politicization exemplifies how educational programs can become ‘battlefields’ for ideologies of biological normativity. The example of the cancelation of the FLEX program by the Russian Federation is used to understand key relationships between biopolitics and geopolitics, modern and post-modern, and value transfer and human capital.
listelement.badge.access-status Avatud juurdepääs ,
The visual biopolitics of Mariupol: a comparative analysis of Russian and Ukrainian visuals on Telegram
(Tartu Ülikool, 2024) Wenk, John; Makarychev, Andrey, juhendaja; Tartu Ülikool. Sotsiaalteaduste valdkond; Tartu Ülikool. Johan Skytte poliitikauuringute instituut
How does pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian visual media construct different regimes of visibility through depictions of Mariupol? Visuals play an increasingly important role in how people communicate and generate discourse, especially in conflicts, but the role of visuals in international relations remains understudied. This thesis expands the understanding of this connection by using visual discourse analysis with a biopolitical focus to analyze 20 pictures to analyze this phenomenon in the context of Russia’s occupation of Mariupol. The photos analyzed come from the competing Telegram channels of the current pro-Russian Mariupol City Administration and the exiled pro-Ukrainian Mariupol City Council. This thesis finds that the two channels construct radically different regimes of visibility with their respective pictures by emphasizing different political themes and through how they frame the relationship of Mariupol’s citizens with Russia and Ukraine. The pro-Russian pictures emphasize Mariupol’s unity with Russia and have characteristics of biopolitical paternalism, while the pro-Ukrainian pictures focus on remembrance of Russian crimes and build a negative and necropolitical perspective of Russia’s occupation of Mariupol. These findings provide insight into the important ways that visuals can generate their own discourse which either supports or undermines different authorities and narratives. The process used here can be expanded with a larger sample size for a more comprehensive analysis, or it can be applied to other conflicts, such as between Israel and Palestine, to uncover and analyze visual sources of political meaning which may be missed when using other methods.