权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Human Rights and the Political: Insurgent Citizenship at the Aboriginal Tent Embassy, Canberra, Australia 1972-

人权与政治：澳大利亚堪培拉原住民帐篷大使馆的叛乱公民身份，1972 年-

基本信息

批准号：
AH/I00193X/1
负责人：
Andrew Schaap
金额：
$ 6.84万
依托单位：
UNIVERSITY OF EXETER
依托单位国家：
英国
项目类别：
Fellowship
财政年份：
2011
资助国家：
英国
起止时间：
2011 至无数据
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=AH%2FI00193X%2F1
关键词：
Human Rights Political Insurgent Citizenship

项目摘要

Following Hannah Arendt, the right to have rights is the right to belong to a political community in which one's opinions are significant and one's actions are effective. This project will examine how marginalized groups such as indigenous people enact the right to have rights through practices of insurgent citizenship. In this context, the project will address a practical and a conceptual paradox.The practical paradox concerns how best to understand the politics of human rights exemplified in the struggle of the Aboriginal tent embassy in Australia. The movement for Aboriginal sovereignty began in Australia in 1972 when several young indigenous men claimed to establish an embassy in front of Parliament House on behalf of the Aboriginal nation. In this demonstration, immanent outsiders to a polity (indigenous people) claimed a right that they did not have within existing practices of citizenship. Human rights are commonly viewed as universal entitlements that we have as human beings irrespective of our membership in a particular political community. But the demonstration of Tent Ambassadors seem to reverse this common sense: the protesters demonstrate their universal entitlement as human beings by both insisting on their status as 'aliens' within the Australian polity and acting as if they are citizens of a Sovereign Aboriginal Nation.The conceptual paradox follows from this and concerns the paradox that Arendt's notion of the right to have rights gives rise to. Arendt's prescient analysis of the perplexities of the rights of man, published just after the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948, seemed to show that it is only by virtue of citizenship that we have any rights at all. In inter-war Europe, stateless people found themselves in precisely the situation in which they needed to invoke their human rights. Yet they were effectively rightless. Consequently, Arendt claimed that the only true human right is the right to have rights. But this leads to the question in what sense those who become rightless (by virtue of being excluded from citizenship) might claim the right to have rights. The project will address this paradox by examining how Arendt's analysis of the right to have rights has been developed within three paradigms in contemporary political theory, exemplified in the work of Seyla Benhabib (Frankfurt school), Giorgio Agamben (Heideggerian) and Jacques Rancière (post-Marxist).The project will analyse the languages and practices through which immanent outsiders invoke human rights to engage in acts of insurgent citizenship. The study of languages will inquire into what can be said. It will do so by investigating Arendt's conception of the right to have rights and how it has been interpreted in contemporary political theory. The study of practices will inquire into what can be done. It will investigate the strategies of insurgent citizenship exemplified by the Tent Ambassadors and their impact on the practices of citizenship they contest. Rather than distinguishing sharply between theory and practice, the specialized discourse of political theorists and the political activism of the social movements will be treated as different aspects of generalized political thinking ('the political') that is the proper object of reflection of a political theory of politics.A workshop will be held in Canberra to engage Aboriginal activists and scholars in the project. The main outcomes will be a sole-authored monograph and a co-edited book (with Shino Konishi, ANU), including a contributing chapter and co-authored introduction.

继汉娜·阿伦特之后，拥有权利的权利是属于一个政治共同体的权利，在这个政治共同体中，一个人的意见是重要的，一个人的行动是有效的。该项目将审查土著人民等边缘化群体如何通过叛乱公民身份的做法来行使权利。在这方面，该项目将处理一个实际和概念上的矛盾，即如何最好地理解澳大利亚土著帐篷大使馆的斗争所体现的人权政治。澳大利亚原住民主权运动于1972年开始，当时几名年轻的原住民男子声称代表原住民民族在议会大厦前建立大使馆。在这次示威中，一个政体的外来者（土著人民）要求享有他们在现有公民身份实践中所不享有的权利。人权通常被视为我们作为人类所享有的普遍权利，而不论我们是否属于某一政治共同体。但帐篷大使的示威似乎颠倒了这一常识：抗议者既坚持自己在澳大利亚政体中的“外国人”地位，又表现得好像他们是一个主权土著民族的公民，以此来证明他们作为人类的普遍权利。概念上的悖论由此而来，并涉及阿伦特关于拥有权利的权利的概念所产生的悖论。阿伦特在1948年《世界人权宣言》发表后不久发表的对人权困惑的前瞻性分析似乎表明，只有凭借公民身份，我们才能享有任何权利。在两次世界大战之间的欧洲，无国籍人发现自己正处于需要援引其人权的境地。然而，他们实际上没有权利。因此，阿伦特认为，唯一真正的人权是拥有权利的权利。但这就引出了一个问题，即那些（由于被排除在公民身份之外）变得没有权利的人在什么意义上可以要求享有权利。该项目将探讨阿伦特对享有权利的权利的分析是如何在当代政治理论的三种范式中发展起来的，这三种范式体现在Seyla Benhabib（法兰克福学派）、Giorgio Agamben（海德格尔学派）和Jacques Rancière（后马克思主义者）的著作中，该项目将分析无情的局外人援引人权从事叛乱公民行为的语言和做法。语言研究将探究什么可以说。它将这样做，通过调查阿伦特的权利概念，拥有权利，以及它是如何在当代政治理论解释。对实践的研究将探讨可以做些什么。它将调查以帐篷大使为例的叛乱公民身份的战略及其对他们所质疑的公民身份做法的影响。政治理论家的专门论述和社会运动的政治活动将被视为广义政治思想（“政治”）的不同方面，而不是严格区分理论和实践。广义政治思想是政治的政治理论的适当反映对象。将在堪培拉举办一个研讨会，让土著活动家和学者参与该项目。主要成果将是一本单独撰写的专著和一本共同编辑的书（与新野小西，ANU），包括一个贡献的章节和共同撰写的介绍。