- Alumni & Donors
- In the News
- Support CERI
Actualités à la une
Béatrice Hibou answers our questions on political domination, a concept she scrutinizes in her book, The Political Anatomy of Domination, published in the Sciences Po series in International Relations and Political Economy with Palgrave Macmillan, in April 2017.
- Where does the title “political anatomy” come from?
- The title of my book is evidently a tribute to Michel Foucault who offered a “political anatomy of details” in his book Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. It is also a tribute to Karl Marx whom Foucault cited as a reference as well, and who worked on an “anatomy of capital.” Among other references, these two authors have inspired me to attempt a political anatomy of domination in authoritarian states, based on economic practices: I try to show how the most banal economic dispositifs and practices as well as everyday economic life pertain to domination mechanisms. In other words, I consider the economic arena as a place of power, a non-autonomous field, a site where power struggles and games of power and domination can be analyzed in their everyday workings to bring out the multiplicity of dimensions and rationalities.
- What is political domination according to you?
- The best definition of domination for me, is the one given by Max Weber: “‘domination’ does not mean that a stronger force of nature somehow prevails, but that the action (‘command’) of certain people is related in terms of its meaning to the action (‘obedience’) of certain other people, and vice versa, so that one may, on the average, count on the realization of the expectations according to which the action of both sides is oriented.”
Interview with Philippe Bonditti, one of the co-editors of the new book published in the CERI Sciences Po Series on International Relations and Political Economy, Palgrave MacMillan, 2017.
- What is the modern international?
- This is, at least in part, the question that the contributors of this volume have engaged with – not to answer the question in a definitive way, rather, to build the international as an “object for thought” (objet pour la pensée), from and/or using Michel Foucault’s work and within a larger process of problematization that questions four of the main and largely unchallenged characteristics of our contemporary world: (neo)-liberal, biopolitical, global, and international. Indeed, the international belongs to the long list of “unthoughts” that structure our everyday practices and our schemes for interpreting the present and past, realities. Note that “international” is mainly used as an adjective, therefore to qualify something other than itself. The system, organizations, relations, law are said to be “international”.
Béatrice HibouClaire Andrieu et Michel Margairaz (dir.)
Le nuove migrazioni: Luoghi, uomini, politiche. Geografia e organizzazione dello sviluppo territorialeCatherine Wihtol de Wenden
N° 3, vol. 3, 2016Dominique Colas
Jean-Pierre FiliuMonique Jo Beerli, Isabel Rocha de Siqueira, Christopher C. Leite (dir.)
Thierry Chopin, Michel Fourcher (dir.)