Political Animal Research Articles

Racist dogs and classist rats?

In cities across the world, animals reflect, reproduce and transform urban inequalities – yet their role in mediating social hierarchies remains undertheorized. Urban scholars have begun to highlight the importance of infrastructures and technologies in configuring access to essential goods and services. While this research provides key insights into how non-human entities mediate unequal relations, it has largely overlooked how certain animals – „political animals“ – also co-produce inequalities. This article focuses on two critical urban domains, security and public health, that are often characterized by stark inequalities, and takes the role of key animals within these domains – dogs and rats, respectively – as a new analytical entry-point. Security dogs are socialized to identify threatening individuals on the basis of classed and raced markers. Rats thrive in upscale neighborhoods with historical architecture and abundant green space – yet the public health risks and the stigma associated with these rodents may disproportionately affect low-income residents. Drawing on research on security dogs in Kingston, Jamaica and rats in Amsterdam, this talk discusses the role of animals in the formation of sociospatial boundaries, and the distribution of resources and risks across urban spaces and populations. Focusing on the interactions these two types of „political animals“ have with both humans and infrastructure, it sets out a research agenda for studying how animals’ everyday encounters with their cultural and material environments combine to result in (in-)equitable social outcomes.

Aristotle’s concept of zoon politikon: on political benefits of being not too perfect

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE: The article discusses the concept of zoon politikon in order to provide arguments justifying the attractiveness of Aristotle’s practical philosophy.
 THE RESEARCH PROBLEM AND METHODS: There are three quasi-definitions of man in Aristotle’s works, each of which emphasises a different aspect of humanity. According to the philosopher, we are speaking animals, political animals (zoa politika) and the only animals endowed with reason. I argue that it is the condition of zoon politikon that comes to the fore as the most human of human properties. The article uses a historical-philosophical method supported by textual analysis.
 THE PROCESS OF ARGUMENTATION: In the first part of the text, Aristotle’s term zoon politikon is analysed as a concept intended to show the superiority of humanity over animality. In the second part, it is presented as a limitation that distinguishes humans from gods. By analysing how these two perspectives overlap, it is then possible to discuss some political consequences of the tension between them.
 RESEARCH RESULTS: The analysis leads to the conclusion that, according to Aristotle, a good human is not someone who “exercises rationality to a high degree”, but above all someone who is political to a high degree. It also suggests that Aristotle’s concept can be used to distinguish between two kinds of politics, which should not be reduced to each other: “artificial” politics (which can be equated with power), and natural human politics (which is based on free individual action in the area of praxis).
 CONCLUSIONS, INNOVATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS: The notion of zoon politikon reflects the relational character of the individual human self, and thus offers a perspective that allows both methodological and political individualism to be challenged. It can also be a source of inspiration for those scholars, who argue that politics cannot be reduced to power.

Political animality

AbstractThis essay contributes to contemporary discussions concerning so‐called animal politics by drawing from the history of the notion of political animal. Two different historical meanings of the notion are identified: (1) normative political animality that is intrinsically linked with rationality, language, and justice; (2) biological political animality that focuses on collaboration for the sake of a common aim. The former is applicable only to human beings, while the latter can also be used in relation to other animals. After briefly discussing the Aristotelian background of the notion, the essay argues that in medieval Aristotelian tradition, the normative meaning prevailed and the biological one was set aside. However, it is precisely the biological notion that appears useful today. The essay suggests several ways in which it might benefit contemporary theoretical discussions concerning animals, thus laying ground for further developments in animal politics.

Relating Substances

Abstract: Can Aristotle’s ontology account for the centrality of relations in the nature of political animals? This article responds to scholars who claim that it cannot, and argues that Aristotle’s conceptual framework in the practical writings is consistent, and continuous, with his first philosophy. Aristotle’s ontology of living beings already assigns a central and constitutive role to relations, both with respect to the exercise of their essential activities and with respect to their connections to other members of their group. Moreover, his thought is hospitable to relational thinking because of the role that it assigns to active receptivity. The fact that our lives are more interconnected than those of any other species does not call into question his ontology; rather, it illustrates how his metaphysics works in the case of the distinctive substances that we are, namely, animals with logos.

Познание чужого как способ самопознания: Запад, Индия, Россия (попытка ксенологии)

The article proposes a philosophical concept of “xenology” (the science of alien) as a way of knowing oneself through the knowledge of the culturally and civilizationally alien as a way of forming identity “self-construction”. The author formulates four principles of xenology. First: we can realize our Self only through the “not-Me”, the other, the alien. Second: civilizational, cultural and national identity is actualized when confronted or in conflict with someone else's identity. For example, the Greeks realized themselves as “political animals” only against the background of “barbarians”. Third: our “self-construction” is already embedded in the very model of someone else. Fourth: the image of a stranger in a particular culture can serve as an important indicator of its level of development (tell me what your alien is, and I'll tell you what you are), as well as an instrument of both self-affirmation and self-understanding, self-esteem, self-criticism, and a stimulus for self-improvement. As an illustration of these principles, the article offers nine models of the alien, highlighted on the material of the cultural history of two civilizations – European and Indian as well as in connection with the analysis of modern Russian reality. The models develop into a sequence that is determined by the movement from the biological to the social and cultural: xenophobic (ethological), mythological, model of antipodes, model of races, model of the initial state, passeist model, model of the natural state, heterotopic and universalist models. We humans, as a biological species, have a fear of the alien, but we rise above this fear with the help of social and cultural mechanisms that allow us to expand and deepen our identity from family, collective, ethnos, nation to the entire human race (presumption of humanity). In the conclusion of the article, the author examines the manipulation of “friend-foe” identities based on the xenophobic model in modern Russian political discourse.

Political animals in the Modern World: An Investigation of the National Animal Symbol

AbstractNational symbols play a significant role in contemporary politics by shaping national identities. However, national animals receive little attention in the scholarship. This paper analysed the national animal’s history, strengths, formation and implications as a political symbol. It argues that using the animal as a national symbol has distinctive strengths because animal symbols have concrete traits and an interactive dimension. However, the national animals are not granted the same political significance in the formal institutional setting as other symbols because of the concern about exacerbating disunity between nations and potential undesirable international responses. Nonetheless, when the separatist movements of Catalonia and Flanders utilise the national animal, it does not face the same challenges and therefore has received more popularity from the nationals.

Alasdair MacIntyre: An Intellectual Autobiography by Émile Perreau-Saussine and translated by Nathan J. Pinkoski

French author and former lecturer in the Department of Politics and International Studies at the University of Cambridge, Émile Perreau-Saussine (1972-2010), has produced an intellectual autobiography of famed philosopher, Alasdair MacIntyre (born in 1929). Nathan J. Pinkoski, Research Fellow and Director of Academic Programs at the Zephyr Institute, has rendered the original French edition into English translation. Released by the University of Notre Dame Press in 2022, the volume constitutes a concise yet thoughtful interpretation of the whole of MacIntyre’s corpus. The text analyzes MacIntyre’s contributions to politics, philosophy, and theology, explaining both MacIntyre’s intellectual and historical influences and his continued relevance for the contemporary problems facing the modern world. The volume begins with a Foreword by Pierre Manent, Professor Emeritus of Political Philosophy at the École des Haute Études en Sciences Sociales, the same that appears in the original French edition. Manent praises what he finds to be a balanced evaluation of MacIntyre, one that possesses the “necessary sympathy” while simultaneously maintaining an objective eye. But beyond praising Perreau-Saussine’s account, Manent raises concerns of his own that are worth mentioning as they anticipate many of the issues that Manent raises in his own recent work, Natural Law and Human Rights: Toward a Recovery of Practical Reason. While Manent praises MacIntyre for “identifying the central lacuna in our approach to the modern world”—the loss of real consideration of human action and practical reason, Manent is also critical of how MacIntyre departs from a more faithful understanding of Aristotle. Specifically, Manent is concerned with MacIntyre’s predilection for treating human persons as “social animals” rather than “political animals” and the implications of this approach. One manifestation of this approach, according to Manent, is that MacIntyre’s technical models of practical action place MacIntyre closer to Oakeshott than Aristotle in his understanding of tradition. The upshot of this criticism is that it raises the question of what place MacIntyre really affords human reason—whether it falls to tradition alone to raise us out of the morass of modern society or whether one can appeal to reason to settle questions of common concern or even to scrutinize and critically approbate traditions so as to keep them vibrant and alive. All in all, Manent’s appreciative, but rather critical treatment of MacIntyre is worth reading and serves as a useful contextualization for Manent’s recent work.

How street‐level dilemmas and politics shape divergence: The accountability regimes framework

AbstractHierarchical accountability often proves insufficient to control street‐level implementation, where complex, informal accountability relations prevail and tasks must be prioritized. However, scholars lack a theoretical model of how accountability relations affect implementation behaviors that are inconsistent with policy. By extending the Accountability Regimes Framework (ARF), this paper explains how multiple competing subjective street‐level accountabilities translate into policy divergence. The anti‐terrorism “Prevent Duty” policy in the United Kingdom requires university lecturers to report any student they suspect may be undergoing a process of radicalization. We ask: what perceived street‐level accountabilities and dilemmas does this politically contested policy imply for lecturers, and how do they affect divergence? An online survey of British lecturers (N = 809), combined with 35 qualitative follow‐up interviews, reveals that accountability dilemmas trigger policy divergence. The ARF models how street‐level bureaucrats become informal policymakers in the political system when rules clash with their roles as professionals, citizen‐agents, or “political animals.”

At War with Corruption: A Biography of Bill Price, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma by Michael J. Hightower

Reviewed by: At War with Corruption: A Biography of Bill Price, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma by Michael J. Hightower Aaron Bachhofer At War with Corruption: A Biography of Bill Price, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma. By Michael J. Hightower. Foreword by Frank Keating. (Norman, Okla.: 2 Cities Press, 2021. Pp. xx, 466. $29.95, ISBN 978-0-9847056-3-4.) The idea that corruption and chicanery were both frequent and familiar to Oklahomans remains a widely accepted perception of the state’s political history. Proponents posit that residents tolerated this “Soonerism” out of a misplaced sense of prairie populism, general apathy, or genuine ignorance of modern protocol (p. xiii). In At War with Corruption: A Biography of Bill Price, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma, independent historian Michael J. Hightower challenges that perception, arguing that Oklahomans were not tolerant of corruption. Rather, he asserts, the structure of state and local governments made corruption much too easy to institute and terribly difficult to eliminate. To support this notion, Hightower introduces readers to the political life of his friend William S. “Bill” Price, who served as U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Oklahoma from 1975 to 1989 and who spent the vast majority of his public and private life seeking to end political malfeasance in Oklahoma. A native Oklahoman who saw corruption as a threat to the legitimacy of state and national institutions, Bill Price forged ahead in political circles with an enviable fortitude and a sense of fairness that governed his entire public career. Educated at Georgetown University and the University of Oklahoma, Price was a devout Catholic convert and a proud family man. After his tenure as a U.S. Attorney, he mounted unsuccessful campaigns for the governorship and a seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, built a successful law practice, and advocated for criminal justice reform in Oklahoma. His reputation for honesty, hard work, and sharp intellect led his campaign manager and fellow political animal, Tom Cole, to remark that Price was “the best governor Oklahoma never had” (p. x). Aside from Price’s formative years, Hightower details, in abbreviated strokes, the painful series of political cancers that have plagued the Sooner State since its birth: the dispossession and murder of Indigenous Americans; the 1923 impeachment of the anti-Klan governor Jack Walton; the Oklahoma Supreme Court payola scandal of 1964; State Treasurer Leo Winters’s financial issues; and Governor David Hall’s extortion conviction, events that made national news regularly throughout the twentieth century. A significant part of the narrative’s second half focuses on Price’s prosecution of the Oklahoma county commissioner scandal—often called “Okscam” in state and federal circles. Hightower relates that the pervasiveness and normalization of county corruption stunned Price. Powerful county commissioners took bribes—often in exchange for awarding contracts—and the costs of their corruption were passed on to taxpayers. The fact that Price became the lead prosecutor ferreting out these crimes from his federal post illustrated a central weakness in Oklahoma law—the lack of multicounty grand jury systems that gave state prosecutors more discretion in their pursuit of justice. The scandal made Oklahoma a national political joke, but it encouraged officials to pursue much needed reforms in government purchasing and accountability. Price spent the rest of his tenure as U.S. Attorney investigating [End Page 396] drug cartels, bank fraud, corruption at the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, and other odious situations. Readers will find firsthand information included in these pages from Oklahoma political legends like G. T. Blankenship, Henry Bellmon, Frank Keating, Gene Stipe, and Tom Cole—men who helped shape politics in the state for upwards of seventy-five years. Most of the key “good guys” are included here—those who helped Price pursue wrongdoing or provided him with invaluable guidance during his political career. But Hightower’s narrative is missing a wider engagement with sources who might have been critical of Price, or at least those who challenged his commitment to law and order, which would have offered more balance. Hightower should be commended for offering readers a powerful, raw look at politics...

Political Animal: The Life and Times of Stewart Butler by Frank Perez (review)

Political Animal: The Life and Times of Stewart Butler by Frank Perez (review)

Back to Eudaimonia as a Social Relation: What Does the Covid Crisis Teach Us about Individualism and its Limits?

The current health crisis that has spread worldwide has raised many questions regarding our relations to the Other and to ourselves. Through isolating people, Covid-19 has demonstrated the need we face, as human beings, to socialize and to get in contact, physically speaking, with others. As Aristotle stated, human beings are political animals, meaning social animals that can flourish only in the polis through the process of interacting with each other in quest of eudaimonia, i.e. happiness. Along with the rise of socio-physical distancing imposed due to the pandemic, people around the world have experienced isolation and the lack of human contact and interaction. In the Western world this isolation has led to an increase in mental health issues, and this fact has to be taken into consideration by the government when making decisions regarding the reinforcement or the slackening of measures in the context of Covid. The pandemic has shed a light on the limits of individualism as it has developed in some places. The quest for happiness has slowly led some societies to create a kind of a solipsistic world in which there would exist no reality, no truth outside individuals’ perceptions. Consequently, each human being is considered as “the measure of all things,” as Protagoras noted. This unique experience could then give us the grounds to question our relations to each other, to investigate our understanding of eudaimonia, and to revisit what it means to live in a society.

The influence of Karl Marx’s notion of justice on Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach

This paper aims to explore the relationship between Karl Marx’s concept of justice and Martha Nussbaum’s capabilities approach. Nusbaum follows the Aristotelian idea of man as a political animal, which is intrinsically consistent with Marx’s view of human nature, but she provides us with a new normative perspective to reconsider Marxism. When she initially began to design the list of core capabilities, Nussbaum stated that her capabilities approach originated from Marx’s idea of ‘genuinely human functions’, which requires society to provide a reasonable political arrangement so that humans have the ability to obtain real freedom. Her approach relies on Marx’s early understanding of ‘human flourishing’, and it is also influenced by Marx’s ideas about ‘the theory of need’ and ‘the theory of alienation’. From this point of view, Nussbaum’s capability theory of justice reveals different aspects of Marx’s understanding of justice.

Should Animals Have Political Rights?

Should Animals Have Political Rights?

Caviar matter(s): The material politics of the European caviar grey market

The last quarter of a century saw the international political community make concerted efforts to regulate global caviar trade and prevent illegal harvesting of critically endangered sturgeon. Ironically, the regulations have enabled the emergence of novel forms of illicit trade which intertwine legal and illegal streams of caviar on the international marketplace. This paper foregrounds these licit-illicit interfaces and argues that the international caviar trade constitutes a ‘grey market’ characterized by a host of laundering practices that entangle legal and illegal caviar flows. Drawing on geographical scholarship on political animals and fleshy geopolitics, the paper theorises how the fleshy material properties of caviar, namely its chemical-isotope profile and composite form, directly shape the European caviar grey market. By highlighting how the materiality of caviar creates grey interfaces between legal and illegal caviar economies, the paper unsettles dominant dichotomized representations of illegal caviar trade which tend to foster overwhelmingly securitized policy-enforcement approaches in Europe. In pointing to the hidden ‘fleshy geopolitics’ surrounding EU enforcement strategies, the paper calls for a reshaping of policy and enforcement which better attends to the grey dimensions of the caviar market and provides increased protection for wild sturgeon populations and marginalised communities located at the Eastern borders of Europe.

We’re All Political Animals: Insights on Navigating Ideological Divisions at Work and in Daily Life

Whether explicitly or implicitly, organizations often convey that taboo topics, like politics, should be avoided. But politics inevitably seeps into the workplace because ideological views are difficult to suppress and easy to infer. Quite notably, partisanship is one of the strongest identity markers that unites—or polarizes—people today. People tend to self-segregate into ideological echo chambers in their personal lives. But the workplace constitutes one conspicuous context that still requires people with diverse ideological views to regularly communicate and collaborate. And while people are reluctant to admit prejudice based on social-category differences, they freely report and exhibit out-party dislike and hostility. We contend that political (just like demographic) differences can be problematic if organizations do not learn to understand and embrace them, and that ignoring or suppressing such differences is a misguided strategy. The presentations in this symposium build on the reality of affective (political) polarization that increasingly characterizes today’s society but is largely overlooked in management research. Examining a range of a micro-level, dyadic phenomena, this body of empirical research aims to spotlight the interpersonal—especially relatable—side of political ideology among ordinary people at work and in daily life. Together, the four presentations illuminate the theoretical and practical importance of conducting research on a range of political topics despite—and perhaps especially in light of—their controversial nature. We’re All Political Animals: Insights on Navigating Ideological Divisions at Work and in Daily Life Presenter: Brittany Solomon; U. of Notre Dame Presenter: Juliana Schroeder; U. of California, Berkeley Presenter: Michael Rosenblum; NYU Stern School of Business Presenter: Jeffrey Martin Lees; Princeton U. Presenter: Haley Todd; Clemson U. Presenter: Maxwell Barranti; York U.

Hobbes’s On the Citizen: A Critical Guide ed. by Robin Douglass and Johan Olsthoorn

Reviewed by: Hobbes’s On the Citizen: A Critical Guide ed. by Robin Douglass and Johan Olsthoorn Daniel Collette Robin Douglass and Johan Olsthoorn, editors. Hobbes’s On the Citizen: A Critical Guide. Cambridge Critical Guides. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2020. Pp. xi + 251. Hardback, $99.99. Robin Douglass and Johan Olsthoorn’s edited critical guide grew from a European Hobbes Society meeting themed on Hobbes’s On the Citizen (De Cive). Hobbes intended On the Citizen to be the final treatise of his tripartite Elements of Philosophy. Sociopolitical forces demanded that he publish On the Citizen first, and he only later completed the trilogy with two preceding volumes: On the Body (De Corpore) and On Man (De Homine). Despite On the Citizen’s significance, it is often overlooked in scholarly work and in classroom instruction favoring Hobbes’s better-known Leviathan. Douglass and Olsthoorn augment the intellectual landscape by providing an engaging collection of articles that make an important and needed contribution to fill this void. The guide contains twelve chapters authored by well-known scholars such as S. A. Lloyd and A. P. Martinich. Mirroring the order of presentation in On the Citizen, these chapters are organized into three themes: liberty, government, and religion. The contents of these themes are weighed differently in this volume, however. Where over half of On the Citizen is devoted to discussions on government, these editors provide a more in-depth exploration of liberty and religion without neglecting political themes more often associated with Hobbes studies, such as sovereignty and authorization. The volume commences with five chapters on liberty. Deborah Baumgold and Ryan Harding begin this section strongly, comparing On the Citizen to Elements of Law (Hobbes’s first political treatise) in chapter 1. They leverage differences between those two treatises to establish that Hobbes’s geometrical method is analytic, not formalist or synthetic. This is important because Hobbes’s method is one of discovery; it was an empirical approach that led him to narrower questions and, ultimately, to political philosophy. The remaining chapters on liberty cover chiefly moral philosophy. The second chapter provides a defense of Hobbes’s strong rejection of Aristotle’s definition of humans as natural political animals, the third considers the role that self-admiration plays in conflict (and hence, its suitability for regulation), the fourth admirably appraises Hobbes’s thought experiment of parricide to stress the limits of political obligation, and the fifth contains an exploration of the sincerity of Hobbesian right reason. Hobbes rarely strays from the topic of government in On the Citizen; the next three chapters explicitly address this by returning to central political concerns. Authors of these chapters consider despotic sovereignty, liberal principles, and property rights (chapter 6); sociopolitical forces, lordship, and slavery (chapter 7); and Hobbes’s notion of corporate persons, which is presented here as a precursor to authorization (chapter 8). The guide’s last four chapters focus on religion. Hobbes viewed religion as a destabilizing force and political threat since citizens who are torn between the dualism of religious duties and civic duties, or those who are arbiters of their own religious convictions, are never fully committed to the state; such split allegiances can cause disruptive conflicts and instability. [End Page 505] For these reasons, religion is significant for Hobbes’s political program, and it receives a refreshing amount of attention in the volume. The authors here engage with Hobbes’s conflation of the love of God with the laws of nature, which ultimately collapses into obedience to the sovereign (chapter 9); his softened rhetoric against Rome for publishing in France, which changed superficial aspects of church-state relations, but not its fundamental structure (chapter 11); and his selective use of biblical models for grounding contracts, covenants, and sovereign making, as well as why he is selective (chapter 12). Alison McQueen (chapter 10) provides an especially persuasive analysis of Hobbes’s religious concerns, responding to previous scholarship by Jeffrey Collins. Collins argues that there was a shift in Hobbes’s religious focus in the period between Elements of Law and On the Citizen: where in Elements Hobbes was concerned with private inspiration and religious enthusiasm, in On the Citizen he addressed...

An Insult to Biology, and: Political Animals

An Insult to Biology, and: Political Animals Rebecca Wolff (bio) An Insult To Biology This mutualityhow you hiss at me on the phone your expletiveshow I relishthe brutality of prefiguring: partially severingyour head from your body — particular arteries, slicingmotion of my blade. How ruthlessly I would move. For we have made our childrenthey live on the earth and are its last hope and your DNA and my phenotype and the workof our blood constricting — they live together. It’s likelice, persistentmetaphor. Our daughter’shead, hospitableto them. They cross from one home to another,riding the carrier. You don’t know how [End Page 539] to see the seedlikesilver eggs or their flat,hair-colored bodies. They turn themselvessideways. It takes hoursto sit and patiently, lovingly, decipher each nitfrom each long strand of teenage hair. She’safraid to ask you to do this, and afraid to ask youto let me do this. Because of your monstrous implication. Don’t you see the heads will rollcontinuously. Don’t you seethe chopping block. You can’t chopoff someone’s head to rid them of lice. You have to pickthe eggs off with your fingers and put them in a bowl of soapywater. They drown. And then you drink it. That is how to rid a darling head of lice. [End Page 540] Political Animals I am of the 2%We do not speak casually to our petsMine endure my silenceThey warble all day for food even though I feed themjust fine — clearly they are lookingfor something elsefrom me — humans call it lovePsychologists call it attachmentRelational psychologists call it relation.Today — . . . I am so sick of the structure given to me for tellingmy stories. It goes: I am here,sitting in a chair on a special day. It is finally getting cold out,winter 2017, when will people stoptelling me it’s a beautiful day, it’s not beautiful if it’s poisoned.71 degrees in November. One black catsettles in my lap — this is not unusual, nota story worth the centering of my self. Sheis the little sister lap cat. Do youpost pictures of your cats or dogs all day every day? Wellthen I un-follow you. TodayI am sitting in a chair, having forced myselfto stay here long enough for these creaturesI live withto find me trust me experience time passing and me staying still. Theyonly see me standing still when I am standingglued to my phone [End Page 541] scrolling in a stateof doped paralysis, you heard me,there’s nothing good going on thereyou are being drugged, ropedand branded this is no joke. I amhere in my chair to tell you. In my lap the first cat, littlesister, who every day steps aside from her meal with bits to spareon her plate for her big fatbrother, steps aside in a way I haveinterpreted as sisterly,her concern her care her lovefor her brother, who she also licks clean whenhe stands still for it,today it’s cold enoughand he climbs up on the chairto suss out a spotnext to her in my lap. A first. He uses his whiskersand other devicesto calibrate and calculate depth, exactlyhow much space-time he needsdetermines the angle of reclineand now I have two black cats in my lapsleepingwhile I read a review of a bookon the poet Czeslaw Milosz’s long-buried critiqueof Americans, the regular kind, and also Americanintellect and intellectuals,and how they are bought/ [End Page 542] sold, the bubble of consumptionthat makes them sleep/ keeps them from waking. Brothercat shifts and heaves his bulkencroaches a bit on sister’sspot, I feel dangerous in my lap, sisterfeels it too, rises up,hisses like a boss.Her blood runscolder than I thought. Thesekingdomstake the cake. There is no more...

Alienation and action in the young Marx, Aristotle, and Arendt

Alienation and action in the young Marx, Aristotle, and Arendt

Cow, Army And Nationalism: A Political Dialogue

India, for the last few years has become a nation of prohibitions that deliberately or not challenge the nature of democracy and secularism. It is purely credible that, from the status of a domestic animal the cow has transformed to a political animal with National identity, especially during and after the unrests of beef ban. Parallel to this, another operating mode of Nationalism also is being celebrated connecting Indian Army with the romanticized and sentimental concept of the mother land. Constant efforts are made to propagate the patriotic image of Army so that the sense of protection and defense can be nationalized and re-defined. To fight for one’s own land is treated as ‘Kshatriya Dharma’ and this notion is associated with Hindutva. Imposing ban on cow meat is also connected with the same ideology, for cow is treated holy according to the Hindu belief. Army and cow stand parallel in the discourse of Nationalism. The present paper is an attempt to trace the history of Cow Politics and nationalism in India which is not inclusive in nature. As a shared group feeling, nationalism is a concept that holds people together, attached to a single ideology and social conditioning. The question is how the state construct a biased and elite national identity by making use of some seemingly normal narratives in day-today political dialogues. The paper further investigates how the glorified Military narratives accelerate Hindu Nationalism dismantling the marginal voices of farmers challenging the slogan: Jai Javan, Jai Kisan.

2.N. Round table: COVID-19, ethics, and the many publics in public health policy and practice

The term public health is well known. However, there are many meanings and competing ideas about what public health practice, public health policies and public health services are, should be or could be. There are different understandings of public health's main concepts (e.g., health protection and health promotion), diverse underlying basic normative assumptions (e.g., regarding paternalism or justice), and competing views on how public health policies should be developed (e.g., through top down or deliberative/participatory approaches).Different theories and ideologies frame the debate. They refer to the value of privacy and spheres of personal decision-making, the image of human beings as social or political animals, and the role of the liberal-democratic state. Those theories also reflect different historical developments and institutionalized experiences underlying differences in “political cultures” and related understandings of “public”, and consequently, of “public health”. However, we as a “public health community” do not often reflect on the different understandings of “public” in “public health”. E.g., what is the meaning of “public” and what is “public” about public health services? The need to make and evaluate COVID-19 public health policies and practices underlines the necessity for an ongoing reflection to identify good answers. Against this background, the workshop addresses the following questions: What different kinds of understanding of key concepts of “public health” - including the concept of “public” itself - underlie different kinds of interventions, measures and policies to tackle the ongoing public health emergency / the Covid 19 pandemic? What are the ethical lessons from the pandemic and implications for public health policies and activities? The roundtable workshop will start with a key contribution by John Coggon (Chair in Law and Director of Centre for law and Society, University of Bristol), reflecting some core messages of his seminal book “What Makes Health Public?” and recent research on the issue in the light of COVID-19-policies. Together with three further panelists key messages and reflections will be discussed from the different disciplines of political science, ethics, social science and policy / practitioner perspectives, drawing out implications for policy, research and practice. This will be followed by reflections and discussion with the workshop participants and their reflections and insights on these critical questions.Speakers/Panelists John Coggon University of Bristol, Bristol, UK Kai Michelsen Fulda University of Applied Sciences, Fulda, Germany Peter Schröder-Bäck University of Applied Sciences for Police and Public Administration in North Rhine-Westphalia, Aachen, Germany Sadie Regmi Public Health Registrar, University College London, London, UK Key messages In theory, different conceptions of the normativity of the key term “public” lay different foundations for the role of the state and the scope of the policies initialised to advance PH aims.In practice, PH policies are strongly driven by political and economic interests of “the ruling classes”, but modified by civil society and institutionalised historical experiences.