Out of curiosity, what do people think about alternatives to the issue of the rhetoric of humanitarianism that Agamben critiques?
As one major project of the text, he derides the workings of those advocating for the 'essential human rights' as inherently engaging with what might as well be totalitarianism. I, myself, tend to be of a similar persuasion, struggling to understand, on a practical level, what long term changes can come from amending a systemic order that clearly has money, and not people, at its primary interest. (sorry, heart on sleeve, for a moment here). What strikes me as more effective, and perhaps more in line with what Agamben would like to see happen is the more grassroots radical movements that call for a restructuring or at least reimagining that abandon's the dominant rhetoric, though admittedly echoes of 'rights' in perhaps a problematic fashion. I wonder then, what do we do with the Amnesty Internationals and how might we hypothetically reconfigure their work to take up this necessary shift in approach and praxis?
Obviously a lofty question, but I'm interested to hear what people think such ground-level application of Agamben would look like.
for the very reasons you point out. I think Bono's Aid Philosophy bears important similarities to what Agamben critiques. His model, the one he trumpeted at Bridges earlier this year, entails throwing money at a system that is, um, systematically tilted against economic self-determination, political stability, disease control only addresses symptoms, not causes, and calcifies the exchange as one between the permanently donating, and the permanently receiving. He did name-check a few ways to change the structure, like removing US and European farm subsidies, but when asked to respond to the criticism that his method was perhaps insufficient, his only response was: would you deny food to a dying mother if you had food to give? Or words to that effect. Skirted the issue.
Back to Agamben, defining and declaring universal human rights (in the Biblical speech mode of "let there be light; and there was" as if saying "universal human rights!" would make them exist and respected the world over) does sound specious when capitalist concerns repeatedly trump humanitarian concerns--both the UHR declarations and Bono's deep pockets strike me as fixes that fail to recognize or change the real underpinnings of the problem they address.