Entangled Existence: A Posthumanist Perspective on Biopolitics and Human-Animal Subjectivity

The paper employs a posthumanist perspective to deconstruct traditional humanist discourses that have legitimized the subjugation of nonhuman animals and deprived them of ethical consideration by denying them subjectivity.These traditional humanist discourses are not only speciesist but also ableist and racist.They have created not only the categories of human and animal, but also human and subhuman.This raises important questions: What does it mean to be an animal?Does it imply being subhuman or something entirely opposed to being human?What does it mean to be subhuman?Does it equate to being an animal or something different?Underscoring these concerns, the paper seeks to provide a posthumanist perspective on biopolitics, which transcends the conventional anthropocentric understanding of the concept.It focuses on the biopolitical condition of animals.However, by doing so, it does not disregard human issues.Instead, it aims to illustrate an entanglement of animal issues with human issues, in order to advance the conception of a post-anthropocentric and posthumanist continuum of entanglement in which humans could be viewed as sharing common traits of vulnerability with nonhuman animals.Furthermore, the paper discusses how biopolitics directed at humans differs from biopolitics directed at animals.The distinction does not create division and difference but highlights a continuum of continuities, as the mechanisms deployed in the biopolitical management of human lives influence and, in turn, are influenced by those deployed in the biopolitical management of animal lives.Ultimately, it offers a nuanced understanding of biopolitics by redefining bio-zoe relations, which encourages humans to reflect on their own biopolitical condition by speculating on the biopolitical conditions of nonhuman animals.