News
Current Issue
This new issue of Krisis covers a wide array of subjects that are close to the aims and legacy of our journal. Indeed, given the ways in which we are confronted with political agendas that hardly could be described otherwise than as “regressive,” the very title of our journal once again proves to be timely.
This issue contains a dossier of five essays on the topic of “Shame and Citizenship in Democracy”. Jill Locke’s essay discusses how the trope of the child is used in the public debate about the current President of the United States: Donald Trump. Josef Früchtl’s contribution argues for the political potential of impertinence. The dossier is completed with three shorter essays by Darryl Barthé, Lisa Koks & Natalie Scholz, and Tessa de Vet.
Furthermore, two articles are included in this issue. Annemarije Hagen argues that political struggles do not have to rely on an account of the good life, but rather aim at the contestation of the limits of articulated universals. Ivana Perica’s article considers Jacques Rancière’s critique of Hannah Arendt’s thought, and aims to bring both thinkers together.
Robin Celikates and Thijs Lijster interviewed Hartmut Rosa, and Anna Blijdenstein’s had a conversation with Cécile Laborde. Furthermore, Didier Fassin takes issue with Chantal Mouffe’s call for a Left populism, Willem Halffman discusses the legacy of the 2016 Maagdenhuis occupation, and Sigmund Bruno Schilpzand and Tom Kayzel discuss Bruno Latour’s Reset Modernity-project.
Six further book reviews complete this issue. Alma Apt discusses the Dutch translation of Isabell Lorey’s Regierung der Prekären; Natasha Basu reviews Natasha King’s No Borders; Corrado Fumagalli assesses Ryan Muldoon’s Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World; Hans Radder engages with Robert Frodeman and Adam Briggle’s Socrates tenured; Paul Raekstad discusses Elizabeth Anderson’s Private Government; and Robert Sinnerbrink reviews Aesthetic Marx, edited by Johan F. Hartle & Samir Gandesha.
Index
Introduction
Introduction Krisis 2019-1
Articles
How to Engage in Practices of Critique? From a Universal Conception of the Good Life to the Contestation of Universals
The Archipolitics of Jacques Rancière
Essays
Democracy for Impertinent Citizens
Donald Trump is not a Shameless Toddler: The Problems with Psychological Analyses of the 45th US President
Shameless Deplorables
Shame and the Challenges of Postwar Western Democracies
The Problem and Possibility of Unashamed Citizenship: Jill Locke and Friedrich Nietzsche
Beyond the Echo-chamber: An Interview with Hartmut Rosa on Resonance and Alienation
Interview with Cécile Laborde
The Blind Spots of Left Populism
Bezint eer gij bezet! (of niet)
Experimental Procedures for New Ontologies
Reviews
Moderne onzekerheid
An Activist Scholar’s Approach to Theorizing No Borders
Perspectives That Matter
Field Philosophy and the Societal Value of Basic Research
Freedom or Private Government?
The Aesthetics of Ideology
Previous Issues
On the occasion of Karl Marx’s 200th birthday this year, numerous conferences, edited volumes and special issues have celebrated his work by focusing on its main achievements – a radical critique of capitalist society and an alternative vocabulary for thinking about the social, economic and political tendencies and struggles of our age. Albeit often illuminating, this has also produced a certain amount of déjà vu. Providing an occasion to disrupt patterns of repetition and musealization, Krisis proposes a different way to pay tribute to Marx’s revolutionary theorizing. We have invited authors from around the globe to craft short entries for an alternative ABC under the title “Marx from the Margins: A Collective Project, from A to Z” – taking up, and giving a twist to, Kevin Anderson’s influential Marx At the Margins. The chief motivation of this collaborative endeavour is to probe the power—including the generative failures—of Marx’s thinking by starting from marginal concepts in his work or from social realities or theoretical challenges often considered to be marginal from a Marxist perspective. Rather than reproduce historically and theoretically inadequate differentiations between an ascribed or prescribed cultural, economic, geographic, intellectual, political, social, or spatial centre and its margins, the margins we have identified and inspected are epistemic vantage points that open up new theoretical and political vistas while keeping Marx’s thought from becoming either an all-purpose intellectual token employed with little risk from left or right, or a set of formulaic certitudes that force-feed dead dogma to ever-shrinking political circles.
We have welcomed short and succinct contributions that discuss how a wide variety of concepts – from acid communism and big data via extractivism and the Haitian Revolution to whiteness and the Zapatistas – can offer an unexpected key to the significance of Marx’s thought today. The resulting ABC, far from a comprehensive compendium, is an open-ended and genuinely collective project that resonates between and amplifies through different voices speaking from different perspectives in different styles; we envisage it as a beginning rather than as an end. In this spirit, we invite readers to submit new entries to Krisis, where they will be subject to our usual editorial review process and added on a regular basis, thus making this issue of Krisis its first truly interactive one. The project is also an attempt to redeem, in part, the task that the name of this journal has set for its multiple generations of editors from the very beginning: a crisis/Krise/Krisis is always a moment in which certainties are suspended, things are at stake, and times are experienced as critical. A crisis, to which critique is internally linked, compels a critique that cannot consist simply of ready-made solutions pulled out of the lectern, but demand, in the words of Marx’s “credo of our journal” in his letter to Ruge, “the self-clarification (critical philosophy) of the struggles and wishes of the age”.
With contributions from:
Sonja Buckel, Lukas Oberndorfer, Dan Swain, Gerardo Montes de Oca Valadez, Roberto Nigro, Nicola Lauré al-Samarai, Peggy Piesche, Ewa Majewska, Pepijn Brandon, Dan Hassler-Forest, Sina Talachian, Christian Neuhäuser, Sudeep Dasgupta, Sanem Güvenç-Salgırlı, Bruno Leipold, Ankica Čakardić, Daniel de Zeeuw, Darin Barney, Zafer Yılmaz, Gundula Ludwig, Mathijs van de Sande, Isabell Lorey, Julia Tirler, Nikita Dhawan, Mauro Basaure, Yolande Jansen, Max L. Feldman, Niki Kubaczek, Gerald Raunig, Li Yitian, Tania Herrera, Mariana Teixeira, James D. Ingram, János Weiss, Lina Dokuzovic, Bianca Tavolari, Ido de Haan, Birgit Sauer, Felix Stalder, Massimiliano Tomba, Ulrich Brand, Markus Wissen, Michael Klein, Jeanette Ehrmann, Özgür Yalçın, Katharina Hausladen, Marc Tuters, Jeff Diamanti, Chad Kautzer, Gianfranco Casuso, Andrew Poe, Florian Knasmüller, Nora Ruck, Katharina Piening, Marc-Antoine Pencolé, Emmanuel Renault, Joost de Bloois, Anette Baldauf, Moira Hille, Annette Krauss, Wang Ran, Urs Lindner, Serhat Karakayali, Drehli Robnik, Johan Frederik Hartle, Susanne Lettow, Raimund Minichbauer, Eva Meijer, Harriet Bergman & Matt Colquhoun
Digital data increasingly plays a central role in contemporary politics and public life. Citizen voices are increasingly mediated by proprietary social media platforms and are shaped by algorithmic ranking and re-ordering, but data informs how states act, too. This special issue wants to shift the focus of the conversation. Non-governmental organizations, hackers, and activists of all kinds provide a myriad of ‘alternative’ interventions, interpretations, and imaginaries of what data stands for and what can be done with it.
Jonathan Gray starts off this special issue by suggesting how data can be involved in providing horizons of intelligibility and organising social and political life. Helen Kennedy’s contribution advocates for a focus on emotions and everyday lived experiences with data. Lina Dencik puts forward the notion of ‘surveillance realism’ to explore the pervasiveness of contemporary surveillance and the emergence of alternative imaginaries. Stefan Baack investigates how data are used to facilitate civic engagement. Miren Gutiérrez explores how activists can make use of data infrastructures such as databases, servers, and algorithms. Finally, Leah Horgan and Paul Dourish critically engage with the notion of data activism by looking at everyday data work in a local administration. Further, this issue features an interview with Boris Groys by Thijs Lijster, whose work Über das Neue enjoys its 25th anniversary last year. Lastly, three book reviews illuminate key aspects of datafication. Patricia de Vries reviews Metahavens’ Black Transparency; Niels van Doorn writes on Platform Capitalism by Nick Srnicek and Jan Overwijk comments on The Entrepeneurial Self by Ulrich Bröckling.
Image from Tactical Tech‘s “Our Data Our Selves” Project.
With contributions from:
Stefania Milan, Jonathan Gray, Stefan Baack, Helen Kennedy, Lina Dencik, Miren Gutiérrez, Leah Horgan, Paul Dourish, Thijs Lijster, Patricia de Vries, Niels van Doorn, Jan Overwijk & Lonneke van der Velden
Navigate the entire Krisis archive: 1987 – 2018
Krisis is op zoek naar een redactiesecretaris
2020-04-22 11:30:24
Als redactiesecretaris ben je verantwoordelijk het organiseren, voorzitten en notuleren van de redactievergaderingen van Krisis (circa eens per zes weken), het verdelen en monitoren van lopende redactietaken en het coördineren van het gehele redactietraject. Je beheert de mailbox en het peer-reviewplatform van Krisis en bent het centrale aanspreekpunt voor redacteuren, auteurs en peer-reviewers. Daarnaast communiceer je met de eindredacteuren van Krisis en verzorg je de digitale kanalen van het tijdschrift. Bovenal maak je deel uit van het redactiecollectief en denk je mee over de koers van het tijdschrift, de binnengekomen kopij en de inzet van aankomende themanummers.
Krisis is een onafhankelijk academisch tijdschrift dat open access publiceert. De redactie van Krisis bestaat uit academici verbonden aan verschillende universiteiten binnen Nederland én daarbuiten. Aangezien de publicaties van Krisis vrij toegankelijk zijn en de redactie zich vrijwillig inzet, draait het blad een kleine boekhouding. Per verschenen nummer krijgt de redactiesecretaris een vrijwilligersvergoeding van € 800,-. De secretaris is zo’n 2 uur per week kwijt aan mailcorrespondentie, zo’n 6-8 uur per redactievergadering (en het voorbereiden daarvan) en zo’n 20 uur aan het publiceren van een nummer. Al deze taken zullen in nauwe samenwerking met de redactie uitgevoerd worden. De redactie wil ervoor waken de redactiesecretaris een coördinerende (en niet een eindverantwoordelijke) rol te geven. Krisis verschijnt in de regel twee keer per jaar. De redactievergaderingen vinden doorgaans plaats in Amsterdam. De communicatie binnen de redactie verloopt overwegend in het Engels.
De redactiesecretaris heeft affiniteit met de hedendaagse politieke, sociale en cultuurfilosofie, evenals met de “missie” van Krisis. Daarnaast is het van belang dat de redactiesecretaris het leuk vindt om mee te draaien en bij te dragen aan het redactieproces, en dat de redactiesecretaris organisatorisch en administratief bekwaam en betrokken is. Ervaring met digitale media en platforms is een pre, evenals relatieve zekerheid dat je voor tenminste een jaar en het liefst langer beschikbaar bent.
Ben je geïnteresseerd in deze functie, mail dan je motivatie en relevante cv voor 12 juni 2020 naar info@krisis.eu.
Mapping the New Right Wave
2018-04-29 19:57:38
Liberal democracy today is in crisis, or, more accurately, in a state of siege. Not only in the United States but in much of Europe and in many nations across the globe, we are witnessing the advent of a new era of antidemocratic politics, much of it with increasingly authoritarian features.
— Wendy Brown, Peter E. Gordon, and Max Pensky, Authoritarianism: Three Inquiries in Critical Theory (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2018)
How to respond to the rise of the new right as it expands with electoral gains and rhetorical force in the public domain? The Dutch writer Henk van Straten recently likened the dilemma to being caught in a wave, heading somewhere dangerous, yet feeling unable to change its direction. The image of citizens seized in a right-wing wave refers both to those attracted to elements of right-wing politics, as well as those repulsed by it but unable to find anchors for resistance or imagining viable alternatives.
The figure of the wave emphasizes aspects of the new rights’ effective organizational and communicative practices. It shapes how the new right is discussed as a symptom, a threat, a result of prior forces, or a warning for future developments. It also affects the process and form of resistance. For individuals and collectives, experiencing the new right as a wave informs how they feel empowered or helpless in relation to it, how hopes and fears become articulated and embodied, and so on.
While the description and experience of the new right as a wave seems ubiquitous across different political settings and shared in many countries, its specific meanings and functions diverge in each context – and depending on the perspective taken. An incumbent government will articulate the wave-like character of the new right differently than a member of a right-wing youth movement; for a union member in Brazil the ‘new right wave’ means something different than for a union member in the Netherlands.
How to critically deconstruct the wave as a way of describing and experiencing this political moment? How to explore its vital elements? How can we see across different local settings without losing a sense of their specificities? In addition to reflections on the figure of the wave as a particular way of framing the current political moment, we invite academic or artistic contributions that map the rise of the new right from an (inter)national comparative perspective, with a specific emphasis on responses and (the problems of) resistance in each setting. Shorter essays with a regional focus are welcomed as well.
The formats of the contributions can vary from (peer-reviewed) articles (5000-8000 words) to essays (2000-5000) and book reviews (1500-2500). Abstracts can be submitted here until June 30th 2019. See here for additional information on submissions.
{:en}Boekpresentatie{:}{:nl}Boekpresentatie {:}
2018-04-28 10:36:41
{:en}
Op maandagavond 11 juni presenteert Gijs van Oenen zijn nieuwe boek Overspannen Democratie. Hoge verwachtingen, paradoxale gevolgen, in Spui 25, van 20-21.30u. Er is een discussiepanel bestaande uit de hoogleraren politicologie Sarah de Lange en Tom van der Meer; de gespreksleiding is in handen van Irena Rosenthal. Het boek is inmiddels al in de winkel verkrijgbaar! Wie wil komen: het is gratis, wel even aanmelden.
Op maandagavond 11 juni presenteert Gijs van Oenen zijn nieuwe boek Overspannen Democratie. Hoge verwachtingen, paradoxale gevolgen, in Spui 25, van 20-21.30u. Er is een discussiepanel bestaande uit de hoogleraren politicologie Sarah de Lange en Tom van der Meer; de gespreksleiding is in handen van Irena Rosenthal. Het boek is inmiddels al in de winkel verkrijgbaar! Wie wil komen: het is gratis, wel even aanmelden.
{:}
{:en}Evenement: Kennis, Kunst, Kritiek{:}{:nl}Evenement: Kennis, Kunst, Kritiek{:}
2018-04-27 09:20:33
{:en}
Op vrijdag 1 juni wordt aan de hand van de thema’s kennis, kunst en kritiek naar de herinnering en actualiteit van 1968 gekeken in Vox-Pop in Amsterdam.
Met workshops, paneldiscussies, exposities, en aan het eind van de dag kritiese poezie & performances.
Op vrijdag 1 juni wordt aan de hand van de thema’s kennis, kunst en kritiek naar de herinnering en actualiteit van 1968 gekeken in Vox-Pop in Amsterdam.
Met workshops, paneldiscussies, exposities, en aan het eind van de dag kritiese poezie & performances.
News Archive