{"id":8828,"date":"2014-09-02T15:00:00","date_gmt":"2014-09-02T06:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2014\/09\/02\/en-philo-igf-2014-istanbul-agamben-state-exception\/"},"modified":"2014-09-02T15:00:00","modified_gmt":"2014-09-02T06:00:00","slug":"en-philo-igf-2014-istanbul-agamben-state-exception","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nkzw.jp\/igf\/2014\/09\/02\/en-philo-igf-2014-istanbul-agamben-state-exception\/","title":{"rendered":"Agambenian State of Exception on Global IGF 2014 Istanbul \u2014 Homo sacer and bare life"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

\n

This essay applies the conceptual framework of the Post-Foucault<\/strong> \u2014 most prominently associated with Giorgio Agamben<\/strong> \u2014 to re-read the Global IGF 2014 Istanbul conference. Target audience: researchers, doctoral students, policy analysts, and executives.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Introduction: The Problem<\/h2>\n

In Homo Sacer and State of Exception, Agamben analyzes how contemporary governance normalizes the exception. Cybersecurity discourse and emergency internet shutdowns represent a form of this state of exception.<\/p>\n

This essay argues that the multistakeholder process of Global IGF becomes intelligible in its specificity only through the concept of Homo sacer and bare life<\/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

Cyber state of exception<\/h2>\n

NETmundial\u6210\u679c debated at Istanbul in 2014 entails the threshold question of who counts as a citizen to be protected and who as the "bare life" to be surveilled. The operation of related legislation in T\u00fcrkiye reveals how this threshold is drawn.<\/p>\n

The conference theme "Connecting Continents for Enhanced Multistakeholder Internet Governance" carries implications beyond a mere policy slogan. It can be positioned as a contemporary reformulation, in digital-era vocabulary, of the kinds of questions Giorgio Agamben problematized.<\/p>\n

The form of the Global IGF stands between the principle of national sovereignty and the logic of a global public realm that transcends it.<\/p>\n

Digital homo sacer<\/h2>\n

Giorgio Agamben's concepts are not confined to abstract philosophical discussion; they apply to the concrete agenda items debated at the 2014 conference. We examine that application below.<\/p>\n

1. Application to "NETmundial\u6210\u679c"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "NETmundial\u6210\u679c" can be positioned, from the perspective of Giorgio Agamben's Homo sacer and bare life<\/strong>, as a central problematic. In T\u00fcrkiye's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around NETmundial\u6210\u679c are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

2. Application to "\u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc" can be positioned, from the perspective of Giorgio Agamben's Homo sacer and bare life<\/strong>, as a derivative problematic. In T\u00fcrkiye's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30d7\u30e9\u30a4\u30d0\u30b7\u30fc are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

3. Application to "\u30de\u30f3\u30c7\u30fc\u30c8\u66f4\u65b0"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u30de\u30f3\u30c7\u30fc\u30c8\u66f4\u65b0" can be positioned, from the perspective of Giorgio Agamben's Homo sacer and bare life<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In T\u00fcrkiye's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u30de\u30f3\u30c7\u30fc\u30c8\u66f4\u65b0 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

4. Application to "\u767a\u5c55"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u767a\u5c55" can be positioned, from the perspective of Giorgio Agamben's Homo sacer and bare life<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In T\u00fcrkiye's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u767a\u5c55 are particularly at stake.<\/p>\n

5. Application to "\u56fd\u9023\u9023\u643a"<\/h3>\n

Discussion of "\u56fd\u9023\u9023\u643a" can be positioned, from the perspective of Giorgio Agamben's Homo sacer and bare life<\/strong>, as a peripheral yet important problematic. In T\u00fcrkiye's context, the three layers of regulatory design, social implementation, and citizen participation around \u56fd\u9023\u9023\u643a 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 Giorgio Agamben perspective carries three practical implications for executives operating in T\u00fcrkiye.<\/p>\n

First, it raises the reflexive question of how the firm's business model connects to the logic of Homo sacer and bare life<\/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 Giorgio Agamben's framework to other IGF conferences<\/li>\n
  2. Comparative contrast between Post-Foucault<\/strong> and other theoretical traditions<\/li>\n
  3. Exploration of dialogue possibilities with the indigenous intellectual traditions of T\u00fcrkiye<\/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