jueves, 28 de agosto de 2025

Negarles la vida, y hasta la mención

Judith Butler escribe en defensa del subalterno sin voz, de los cuerpos humanos sin voz y sin mención en las historias... pero los cuerpos humanos más carentes de voz entre los enmudecidos por la historia, a saber, los abortados no nacidos y no llorados, no tienen mención ni presencia en su ética de la resistencia. Hay algunas objeciones éticas a las que hay que dar voz.

Texto completo en español:

Negarles la vida, y hasta la mención

https://personal.unizar.es/garciala/publicaciones/negarleslavida.pdf

In English:

Denying the ungrieved, and the unborn, a life, and even a mention

https://personal.unizar.es/garciala/publicaciones/denyingthe.pdf

Judith Butler writes on the defense of the subaltern without a voice, of voiceless and unnamed human bodies in history... but the most voiceless of voiceless human bodies are left unmentioned and unaccounted for in her ethics of resistance. Some ethical misgivings do need to be voiced out.

—oOo—

Negarles la vida, y hasta la mención

En su ensayo sobre si se puede llevar una buena vida en una sociedad injusta, Judith Butler habla, o no habla, de los seres a los que no se nombra, a los que no consideramos humanos, a los que situamos más allá de nuestras simpatías y alianzas—por ejemplo el esclavo, la mujer oprimida, el judío en el campo de concentración.... O el feto no nacido (diría yo). Porque todos estamos en última instancia, viene a decir Butler, en la posición del no nacido, implicados en redes de vida y dependencia que comprometen nuestra autonomía personal.

After all, the life I am living, though clearly this life and not some other, is already connected with broader networks of life, and if it were not connected with such networks I could not actually live. So my own life depends on a life that is not mine, not just the life of the Other, but a broader social and economic organization of life. So my own living, my survival, depends on this broader sense of life, one that includes organic life, living and sustaining environments, and social networks that affirm and support interdependency. They constitute who I am, which means that I cede some part of my distinctively human life in order to live, in order to be human at all.

Esta interdependencia universal pone bastante en cuestión, creo, el simplista lema de "nosotras parimos, nosotras decidimos". Butler no nombra para nada (ya se lo podían suponer ustedes) a los no nacidos entre esos "cuerpos" o "seres" a quienes se niega la humanidad, pero sin embargo la aplicación de su razonamiento al argumentario de los pro-vida puede hacerse fácilmente. Porque...
Even the utterance of the name can come as the most extraordinary form of recognition, especially when one has become nameless or when one’s name has been replaced by a number, or when one is not addressed at all.
Puestos a hablar de los que no tienen voz, queda bastante chocante que no se nombre a los que en efecto no tienen voz, en sentido literal, y no me refiero a los mudos.

Queda la cuestión de que, en efecto, Butler no habla para nada de los no nacidos entre sus seres a quienes de desposee de humanidad. Tanto más llamativo es esto porque Butler no habla tanto de sujetos o personas como de "bodies"—y pide una resistencia activa de esos cuerpos (¿pero sólo de los que pueden resistir en la plaza pública?), más allá de la mera protesta o rechazo que Adorno identifica con la actitud crítica:

What Adorno might be said to rule out at such moments is the idea of popular resistance, of forms of critique that take shape as bodies amass on the street to articulate their opposition to contemporary regimes of power. But also resistance is understood as a ‘no-saying’ to the part of the self that wants to go along with (mitzuspielen) the status quo. There is both the idea of resistance as a form of critique that only the elect few can undertake and the idea of resistance as a resistance to a part of the self that seeks to join with what is wrong, an internal check against complicity. These claims limit the idea of resistance in ways that I myself would not finally be able to accept. For me, both claims prompt further questions: what part of the self is being refused, and what part is being empowered through resistance? If I refuse that part of myself that is complicitous with the bad life, have I then made myself pure? Have I intervened to change the structure of that social world from which I withhold myself, or have I isolated myself? Have I joined with others in a movement of resistance, and a struggle for social transformation?

Con quién te unes, y a quién declaras fuera de tus alianzas y simpatías, hasta el punto de ni nombrarlos, ésa es siempre la cuestión.

La aceptación incuestionada de una postura proabortista (o "pro derechos de las mujeres" o "pro derechos reproductivos", como se la llama eufemísticamente), es en la actualidad una piedra de toque para los progresistas o "liberales" en el sentido americano del término. Es una postura pro-elección convenientemente difusa, pues nunca se mencionan los límites de de la elección, que haberlos haylos, claro, siempre—pocas y pocos llegan a abogar directamente por el derecho al infanticidio.

Una resistencia pareja a siquiera mencionar a los no nacidos va junto con la elección pro-choice, en el paquete. Los partidos de la izquierda oficial española, PSOE, IU y diversos nacionalistas radicales, comparten una aversión a la mera mención de los "no lamentados", paralela en todo punto a los doublethink de Butler sobre la cuestión.

Pero,

If resistance is to enact the principles of democracy for which it struggles, then resistance has to be plural and it has to be embodied. It will also entail the gathering of the ungrievable in public space, marking their existence and their demand for liveable lives, the demand to live a life prior to death, simply put.

Esa aparición en el espacio público no debería entenderse sólo (aunque también) en el sentido más literal de manifestaciones de sujetos indignados en una plaza. Y de hecho también los fetos abortados pueden mostrarse en el espacio público—quizá Butler apreciase la idea, y el acto.

El Zeitgeist proabortista

—oOo—

Denying the ungrieved, and the unborn, a life, and even a mention

In her essay on whether one can lead a good life in an unjust society, speaks, and also does not speak, of beings who are not named, who are barely considered human, who are placed beyond the pale of our sympaties and alliances—for instance the slave, the oppressed woman, the Jew in the concentration camp.... or the unborn foetus. Because we are all caught, in the last analysis, she seems to say, in the position of the unborn, implicated in networks of life and of dependency which compromise our personal autonomy:

After all, the life I am living, though clearly this life and not some other, is already connected with broader networks of life, and if it were not connected with such networks I could not actually live. So my own life depends on a life that is not mine, not just the life of the Other, but a broader social and economic organization of life. So my own living, my survival, depends on this broader sense of life, one that includes organic life, living and sustaining environments, and social networks that affirm and support interdepend- ency They constitute who I am, which means that I cede some part of my distinctively human life in order to live, in order to be human at all.

This universal interdendency leads, I think, to a serious questioning of the simplistic pro-choice reasoning, "We give birth, we decide". Butler does not name unborn humans among her "bodies" or "beings" which are refused a recognition of humanity, but the application of her arguments to the "pro-life" movement can easily be effected. Because...

Even the utterance of the name can come as the most extraordinary form of recognition, especially when one has become nameless or when one’s name has been replaced by a number, or when one is not addressed at all.

There remains the issue that Butler doesn´t actually mention unborn foetuses among those beings who are dispossessed of their humanity. Note that she does favor speaking of "bodies" rather than "subjects" or "persons"—and she demands an active resistance on the part of those bodies (—but perhaps only of those who can stage a demonstration on the public square?) beyond the mere protest or refusal that Adorno identifies with a critical attitude:

What Adorno might be said to rule out at such moments is the idea of popular resistance, of forms of critique that take shape as bodies amass on the street to articulate their opposition to contemporary regimes of power. But also resistance is understood as a ‘no- saying’ to the part of the self that wants to go along with (mitzuspielen) the status quo. There is both the idea of resistance as a form of critique that only the elect few can undertake and the idea of resistance as a resistance to a part of the self that seeks to join with what is wrong, an internal check against complicity. These claims limit the idea of resistance in ways that I myself would not finally be able to accept. For me, both claims prompt further questions: what part of the self is being refused, and what part is being empowered through resistance? If I refuse that part of myself that is complicitous with the bad life, have I then made myself pure? Have I intervened to change the structure of that social world from which I withhold myself, or have I isolated myself? Have I joined with others in a movement of resistance, and a struggle for social transformation?

Who you join forces with, and whom you declare alien to your alliances and sympathies, up to the point of refusing even to name them is (perhaps) always the key question.

An unquestioned acceptance of a "pro-choice" stance (and a rather vague one, as the limits of choice are conveniently left unaddressed) is currently the shibboleth of so-called "progressives" or (in the American sense) "liberals". A concominant resistance to even mention the unborn is part and parcel of the deal—the official parties of the Spanish Left, PSOE, IU, and a number of radical-nationalists, share an aversion to the very naming of the "ungrieved" that generously matches Butler´s doublethink on this issue.

But,

if resistance is to enact the principles of democracy for which it struggles, then resistance has to be plural and it has to be embodied. It will also entail the gathering of the ungrievable in public space, marking their existence and their demand for liveable lives, the demand to lead a life prior to death, simply put.

This appearance in the public space should not be understood (merely) in the literal sense of demonstrations of subjects occupying the public squares. But as a matter of fact aborted foetuses can also be displayed on the public space—maybe Butler would appreciate the idea, and the act.

—oOo—

También aquí:

_____. "Negarles la vida, y hasta la mención." In García Landa, Ticking A Way: Blog de notas (abril 2014) 19 April 2014.*

http://www.unizar.es/departamentos/filologia_inglesa/garciala/z14-4.html

2014 DISCONTINUED 2018 – Online at the Internet Archive:

https://web.archive.org/web/20181101092854/http://www.unizar.es/departamentos/filologia_inglesa/garciala/z14-4.html

2020

https://www.flickr.com/photos/garciala/46150839034/in/dateposted-public/

2020

_____. "Negarles la vida, y hasta la mención." In García Landa, Vanity Fea 19 April 2014.* (Judith Butler, the Subaltern, Abortion).

http://vanityfea.blogspot.com.es/2014/04/negarles-la-vida-y-hasta-el-nombre.html

2014 DISCONTINUED 2025 – Online at the Internet Archive.*