{"id":12182,"date":"2020-09-28T19:00:00","date_gmt":"2020-09-28T10:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2020\/09\/28\/en-philo-aprigf-2020-virtual-spivak-subaltern\/"},"modified":"2020-09-28T19:00:00","modified_gmt":"2020-09-28T10:00:00","slug":"en-philo-aprigf-2020-virtual-spivak-subaltern","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2020\/09\/28\/en-philo-aprigf-2020-virtual-spivak-subaltern\/","title":{"rendered":"Spivakian Subaltern on AprIGF 2020 Virtual \u2014 \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Thumbnail\"<\/p>\n

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Postcolonial \/ Deconstruction<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the AprIGF 2020 Virtual conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

Spivak theorized the difficulty of the subaltern's voice being heard as such. The representativeness of "civil society," "developing countries," and "youth" at AprIGF carries this difficulty.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of AprIGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, and that the concept itself undergoes transformation under the new material of digital space. Describing this mutual transformation is the task of this essay.<\/p>\n

\"Analytical<\/p>\n

Audibility of the digital subaltern<\/h2>\n

The translation process by which voices from further subaltern groups within Online (rural, ethnic minorities, the poor) reach IGF involves an essentially ethical question. COVID-19 addresses this superficially but root resolution remains difficult.<\/p>\n

Each session's agenda-setting can be read as a contemporary restaging of the Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak-type problematic.<\/p>\n

The regional IGF (AprIGF) holds a philosophically distinct position as the intermediate category mediating global universality and national particularity.<\/p>\n

Ethics of translation<\/h2>\n

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2020 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "COVID-19"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "COVID-19" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around COVID-19 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u9060\u9694\u6559\u80b2"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u9060\u9694\u6559\u80b2" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u9060\u9694\u6559\u80b2 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "\u8aa4\u60c5\u5831"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u8aa4\u60c5\u5831" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u8aa4\u60c5\u5831 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u5730\u57df\u5354\u8abf are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf" can be positioned, from the perspective of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In Online's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u8d8a\u5883\u30c7\u30fc\u30bf are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

\"Philosophical<\/p>\n

Implications for Executives and Practitioners<\/h2>\n

The philosophical reflection of this essay is not merely academic. The Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in Online.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of \u201cCan the Subaltern Speak?\u201d<\/strong>. Second, in dialogue with regulators and civil society, it suggests dimensions of consensus formation that purely technical arguments cannot reach. Third, it indicates that the long-term ground of business legitimacy lies not so much in technical advantage or market share as in participation in such philosophical-normative debates.<\/p>\n

Academic Positioning and Future Research<\/h2>\n

The argument of this essay attempts to graft a philosophical perspective onto the mainstream political-science and legal approaches to internet governance research. Three future research questions follow.<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Verification of the applicability of Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Postcolonial \/ Deconstruction<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of Online<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    In particular, the third point has the potential to liberate IGF research from West-centric debate and open a more multi-layered discursive space.<\/p>\n

    \n

    Primary Sources<\/strong><\/p>\n