Aristotelesçi etik, erdemlerin nasil dogru bir biçimde kavramsallastirildigina ve failleri degerlendirmemizde nasil çalistigina iliskin, endoxaya olan yakin uyumu hususunda kendisiyle övünür. Ancak bazi elestirmenler, bu erdemler tasvirinin, esasinda gerçekçi olmadigini iddia ederler. Bu elestirinin önemli ve güçlü oldugunun kanitlanmis bir örnegi Aristotelesçiligin bilgi yolunda güvenilir olmak için erdemli insandan çok fazla sey istedigi iddiasidir.

What does Rancière’s political thought mean today? We interviewed to answer this important question with Oliver Davis, who works in the Department of French Studies at Warwick University and is known for his studies on Rancière. Rancière’in politik düsüncesinin günümüzdeki anlami nedir? Bu soruyu yanitlamak üzere Warwick Üniversitesi, Fransiz Çalismalari bölümünde çalisan ve Rancière hakkindaki çalismalariyla taninan Oliver Davis ile bir röportaj yaptik.

What does Rancière’s political thought mean today? We interviewed to answer this important question with Oliver Davis, who works in the Department of French Studies at Warwick University and is known for his studies on Rancière. Rancière’in politik düsüncesinin günümüzdeki anlami nedir? Bu soruyu yanitlamak üzere Warwick Üniversitesi, Fransiz Çalismalari bölümünde çalisan ve Rancière hakkindaki çalismalariyla taninan Oliver Davis ile bir röportaj yaptik.

The main purpose of this study is to understand social opposition within the framework of “Yellow Vests” and “Anti-vaxxers” who have been occupying French public opinion in recent years. One of the main goals of this study is to conceive the structure of social opposition movements that have grown out of the traditional opposition as a result of increased inequality in France, where society is appeared to be divided as a result of neo-liberal policies. For this reason, instead of addressing social movements literature in general, social groups on which these two social movements are based will be examined by discussing current debates on “Yellow Vests” and “Anti-vaxxer” in France. Although this article is based on the descriptive research methodology, findings that are based on field observation will also use. The main argument of this article is that the cultural interpretation of these movements by the mainstream media will not be sufficient to explain these phenomena, which cannot be downgraded into a common ground. Another argument of the article is that without considering the heterogeneous structure of these movements, which are horizontally structured, do not have a union history, and have limited ideological affiliations will be insufficient, and class dynamics should not be overlooked. In this regard, first, a general framework will be presented in the introduction chapter, and the movement of “Yellow Vests” will be analyzed. In the second chapter, “anti-vaxxer” will be discussed, and the conclusion will be presented.

Özet Bu çalismada, Pierre Bourdieu’nün sosyoloji güzergâhinda ele aldigi kavramlar ve sosyolojiye atfettigi elestirel rol, politik direnis fikriyle düsünülmeye çalisilacaktir. Toplumsal dünyada esitsizligin kökenlerini nesnelcilik ile öznelcilik seklindeki geleneksel ikilikten koparak iliskisel bir kavrayisla çözümlemeye çabalayan Bourdieu, tahakkümün gizli mekanizmalarini inceler. Ona göre, toplumsal dünyayi anlamak bu dünyada yer alan tahakküm biçimlerini ortaya çikarmakla ilgilidir. Toplumsal düzenin titizlikle yapilmis karmasik bir analizi tahakküm biçimlerinin hangi yollarla gerçeklestigini açiga çikarir. Bourdieu, bu tarz bir analize giriserek tahakküm altindakilerin bu baskiyi nasil içsellestirdiklerini ortaya koyar. Onun açisindan, tahakküm altindakiler genel olarak mücadele nesnesi konumunda olan kazançlara ulasmak arzusuyla toplumsal dünyayi olusturan kurucu kurallara ve düzenliliklere uyarlar, hos görülemez olan baski ve sömürü kosullarini kabul ederler; fakat ayni zamanda, bu dünyanin isleyisini de bozabilirler. Hangi toplumsal alanda olursa olsun, tahakküm altindakilerin hâkim konumdakilere karsi belli bir güç kullanabilme imkânlari vardir. Onlarin, politik direnisi hayata geçirme ve baskaldirma olasiliklari her zaman söz konusudur. Bu çalisma, Bourdieu’nün kavramsal çerçevesinde direnis ve degisim için öngördügü olasiliklarin hangi ölçüde hayata geçirilebilecegini, toplumsal düzenin isleyisinde bir bozulma yaratarak radikal bir degisimin toplumsal dayanaklarini olusturup olusturamayacagini sorguluyor. Bourdieu, toplumsal dünyadaki esitsizlik örüntülerinin sürekli olarak yeniden üretilmesine yaptigi tüm göndermelere karsin, politik direnis imkânini daima sosyolojisinde barindirir. Sosyolojik çözümlemesinin hedefi, tahakküm biçimlerini analiz ederek onlara karsi mücadele etmede araçlar sunmasi bakimindan politik bir anlama sahiptir. Bu çalisma da, Bourdieu’yü politik direnis fikriyle düsünerek ondaki politik özgürlük olanaklarini tartismayi hedefliyor. Onun sosyolojik yaklasiminin bilhassa özgürlesimci bir politikayla ve ulus-asiri bir devletin savunusuyla nasil bir bagi oldugunu göstermeye çalisiyor. Böylelikle, Bourdieu’nün sosyolojisinde politik direnisin nasil bir konuma sahip oldugunu olasi direnis kaynaklarini saptayarak ayrintili bir sekilde ortaya koymayi amaçliyor. Abstract In this study, the concepts of Pierre Bourdieu on the route of sociology and the critical role he attributed to sociology will be tried to be considered with the idea of political resistance. Striving to analyze the origins of inequality in the social world with a relational understanding by breaking away from the traditional dichotomy of objectivism and subjectivism, Bourdieu examines the hidden mechanisms of domination. According to him, understanding the social world is about revealing the forms of domination in this world. A studiously complex analysis of the social order reveals the ways in which forms of domination take place. By undertaking this kind of analysis, Bourdieu reveals how the dominated persons internalize domination. From his point of view, those who are dominated generally obey the founding rules and regularities that engender the social world, with desire to achieve the gains that are the object of struggle, accept the intolerable conditions of oppression and exploitation; but they can also disrupt the functioning of this world. Regardless of the social space, the dominated persons have the means to use a certain power against those in the dominant position. There are always possibilities for them to rebel and apply the forms of political resistance. This study questions to what extent these possibilities, Bourdieu envisioned for resistance and changing in his conceptual framework, can be realized, and whether they can constitute the social foundations of a radical change by creating a disruption in the functioning of the social order. Bourdieu always includes the possibility of political resistance in his sociology, despite all the references he makes to the continuous reporduction of patterns of inequality in the social world. The goal of his sociological analysis has a political meaning in that it provides tools to fight against the forms of domination by analyzing them. Here, this study aims to discuss the possibilities of political freedom in Bourdieu by thinking of him with the idea of political resistance. It tries to show how his socological approach is particularly related to an emancipatory politics and advocacy of a transnational state. Thus, it aims to reveal in detail the position of political resistance in Bourdieu’s sociology by identifying possible sources of resistance.

Demokrasi, farkli insanlarin baska baska anlamlarda kullandigi bir sözcük. Kökünün Yunanca demos ile kratos’un bilesiminde yattigindansa kimsenin süphesi yok. Demos, “halk” (yani bir “polis’in yerli eriskin erkek sakinleri) ve kratos da “iktidar” diye tercüme edildiginden beridir, demokrasi “halkin iktidari” seklinde temel bir anlam kazandi.

Özet Walter Benjamin’in Paris Pasajlar Çalismasi kent gerçekliklerine dair etkili felsefi ve politik kavramlar ortaya koymaktadir. Onun “deneyim”, “fantazmagori”, “alegori”, “düs”, ve “uyanis” gibi kavramlari, “flanör” [flâneur], “paçavraci”[chiffonnier] ve “kitle” gibi figürleri kentin diyalektik maddiligini berraklastirmaktadir. Benjamin’de maddecilik sadece ekonomik ve sosyolojik belirleyenlerin incelenmesine degil ayni zamanda metropol yasaminin üreticileri olarak mitlerin, düslerin ve fantazmagorilerin anlasilmasina da yaslanir. Bu makale Paris kentine odaklanarak, Walter Benjamin’in 1935 “Sunum”undan 1939 “Sunum”una politik düsüncesinin gelisimini ortaya koymaktadir. T. W. Adorno’nun Mektuplasmalar’da Benjamin’e yöneltmis oldugu “dolayimsizlik” itirazinin hakliligi sorgulanmistir. Berlinli düsünür, Adorno’nun onda bulmayi umdugu spekülatif felsefeye uygun dolayimlar sunmamasina karsin baska politik dolayim unsurlari gelistirmistir. Bu nedenle bu makalede, Benjamin’in temel amacinin politik ve toplumsal yabancilasmayi bozacak araçlari düzenin disinda degil bizzat varolan düzenin kendisinde aradigini iddia edecegiz. Saf politik araçlar yoktur, bu yüzden politika yabancilasmayi bozacak saf bir zamansalligin yaratilmasina dair bir praksis degildir aksine düzenin bu kesintisiz zamansalligini kendi maddiligiyle kirmaktir. Abstract Walter Benjamin’s Paris Arcades Project reveals philosophical and political concepts and dimensions relevant for studies of urban realities. Both the categories he uses, such as “experience”, “phantasmagoria”, “allegory”, “dream” or “awakening”, and the figures such as “flâneur”, “ragpicker” and “mass” manage to elucidate the dialectical materiality of the city. Benjamin’s materialism addresses not only the analysis of economic and sociological determinants but also the understanding of myths, dreams, and phantasmagoria as “producers” of metropolitan life. The paper, focusing on the city of Paris, attempts to scrutinize the overview of Walter Benjamin’s political thought in the period between 1935 and 1939. T. W. Adorno, in his Correspondences, makes an objection to Benjamin’s thought, suggesting the absence of mediation in it. Although Benjamin did not develop the category of mediation consistent with the speculative philosophy that Adorno hoped to find in his works, he advises his own understanding of what political mediation entails. Consequently, the paper claims that Benjamin’s primary task is to demonstrate that the potentials of political and social disalienation lie not outside but within the existing order. Purely political means do not exist, thus politics is not a praxis of creation of the pure temporality of disalienation, but a rupture in uninterrupted temporality effected through its own materiality.

Özet Walter Benjamin’in Paris Pasajlar Çalismasi kent gerçekliklerine dair etkili felsefi ve politik kavramlar ortaya koymaktadir. Onun “deneyim”, “fantazmagori”, “alegori”, “düs”, ve “uyanis” gibi kavramlari, “flanör” [flâneur], “paçavraci”[chiffonnier] ve “kitle” gibi figürleri kentin diyalektik maddiligini berraklastirmaktadir. Benjamin’de maddecilik sadece ekonomik ve sosyolojik belirleyenlerin incelenmesine degil ayni zamanda metropol yasaminin üreticileri olarak mitlerin, düslerin ve fantazmagorilerin anlasilmasina da yaslanir. Bu makale Paris kentine odaklanarak, Walter Benjamin’in 1935 “Sunum”undan 1939 “Sunum”una politik düsüncesinin gelisimini ortaya koymaktadir. T. W. Adorno’nun Mektuplasmalar’da Benjamin’e yöneltmis oldugu “dolayimsizlik” itirazinin hakliligi sorgulanmistir. Berlinli düsünür, Adorno’nun onda bulmayi umdugu spekülatif felsefeye uygun dolayimlar sunmamasina karsin baska politik dolayim unsurlari gelistirmistir. Bu nedenle bu makalede, Benjamin’in temel amacinin politik ve toplumsal yabancilasmayi bozacak araçlari düzenin disinda degil bizzat varolan düzenin kendisinde aradigini iddia edecegiz. Saf politik araçlar yoktur, bu yüzden politika yabancilasmayi bozacak saf bir zamansalligin yaratilmasina dair bir praksis degildir aksine düzenin bu kesintisiz zamansalligini kendi maddiligiyle kirmaktir. Abstract Walter Benjamin’s Paris Arcades Project reveals philosophical and political concepts and dimensions relevant for studies of urban realities. Both the categories he uses, such as “experience”, “phantasmagoria”, “allegory”, “dream” or “awakening”, and the figures such as “flâneur”, “ragpicker” and “mass” manage to elucidate the dialectical materiality of the city. Benjamin’s materialism addresses not only the analysis of economic and sociological determinants but also the understanding of myths, dreams, and phantasmagoria as “producers” of metropolitan life. The paper, focusing on the city of Paris, attempts to scrutinize the overview of Walter Benjamin’s political thought in the period between 1935 and 1939. T. W. Adorno, in his Correspondences, makes an objection to Benjamin’s thought, suggesting the absence of mediation in it. Although Benjamin did not develop the category of mediation consistent with the speculative philosophy that Adorno hoped to find in his works, he advises his own understanding of what political mediation entails. Consequently, the paper claims that Benjamin’s primary task is to demonstrate that the potentials of political and social disalienation lie not outside but within the existing order. Purely political means do not exist, thus politics is not a praxis of creation of the pure temporality of disalienation, but a rupture in uninterrupted temporality effected through its own materiality.

Abstract This paper will be an effort to argue freedom of speech and speech legislations by a distinction between general social spheres and academic spheres, especially universities in a context-based approach. Within public sphere, the regulation of hate speech is might be more justifiable for specific reasons that is related with the character of public sphere. On the other hand, the universities are the places where the boundaries of mainstream laws and morality are always being tested. This feature of universities should be the essential places where we can open everything to scrutiny which requires a certain character that allows coping with offensive and controversial remarks going against our beliefs and opinions. However, contemporary trend in universities, in the name of expanding hate speech regulations, works against the ideals of academic spheres in several ways, mostly in denying to give a platform to controversial speakers. This creates a contrast that is worth a discussion between the ideals of academic spheres and the practices that hold sway through the actions increasing pressure on free speech within that sphere. Özet Bu makale, genel kamusal alanlar ile akademik alanlar, özellikle üniversiteler arasinda bir ayrim yaparak, ifade özgürlügü ve ifadeye dair yasalara baglamsal bir yaklasim getirme girisimi olacaktir. Genel kamusal alanda, nefret söyleminin düzenlenmesi, kamusal alanin karakteriyle ilgili belirli nedenlerle daha mesru olabilir. Öte yandan üniversiteler, ana akim yasalarin ve ahlakin sinirlarinin her zaman sinandigi yerlerdir. Üniversitelerin bu özelligi, inanç ve görüslerimize aykiri, saldirgan ve tartismali açiklamalarla basa çikmayi saglayan belirli bir karakter gerektiren ve her seyi incelemeye açabilecegimiz temel yerler olmalidir. Fakat, üniversitelerdeki çagdas egilim, nefret söylemi düzenlemelerini genisletme adina, çogunlukla tartismali konusmacilara platform vermeyi reddetmek suretiyle, akademik alanlarin ideallerine çesitli sekillerde aykiridir. Bu durum, akademik ortamlarin idealleri ile bu ortamlarda ifade özgürlügü üzerindeki baskiyi artiran eylemler araciligiyla hüküm süren uygulamalar arasinda tartismaya deger bir karsitlik yaratir.

Özet Bu çalismada, Pierre Bourdieu’nün sosyoloji güzergâhinda ele aldigi kavramlar ve sosyolojiye atfettigi elestirel rol, politik direnis fikriyle düsünülmeye çalisilacaktir. Toplumsal dünyada esitsizligin kökenlerini nesnelcilik ile öznelcilik seklindeki geleneksel ikilikten koparak iliskisel bir kavrayisla çözümlemeye çabalayan Bourdieu, tahakkümün gizli mekanizmalarini inceler. Ona göre, toplumsal dünyayi anlamak bu dünyada yer alan tahakküm biçimlerini ortaya çikarmakla ilgilidir. Toplumsal düzenin titizlikle yapilmis karmasik bir analizi tahakküm biçimlerinin hangi yollarla gerçeklestigini açiga çikarir. Bourdieu, bu tarz bir analize giriserek tahakküm altindakilerin bu baskiyi nasil içsellestirdiklerini ortaya koyar. Onun açisindan, tahakküm altindakiler genel olarak mücadele nesnesi konumunda olan kazançlara ulasmak arzusuyla toplumsal dünyayi olusturan kurucu kurallara ve düzenliliklere uyarlar, hos görülemez olan baski ve sömürü kosullarini kabul ederler; fakat ayni zamanda, bu dünyanin isleyisini de bozabilirler. Hangi toplumsal alanda olursa olsun, tahakküm altindakilerin hâkim konumdakilere karsi belli bir güç kullanabilme imkânlari vardir. Onlarin, politik direnisi hayata geçirme ve baskaldirma olasiliklari her zaman söz konusudur. Bu çalisma, Bourdieu’nün kavramsal çerçevesinde direnis ve degisim için öngördügü olasiliklarin hangi ölçüde hayata geçirilebilecegini, toplumsal düzenin isleyisinde bir bozulma yaratarak radikal bir degisimin toplumsal dayanaklarini olusturup olusturamayacagini sorguluyor. Bourdieu, toplumsal dünyadaki esitsizlik örüntülerinin sürekli olarak yeniden üretilmesine yaptigi tüm göndermelere karsin, politik direnis imkânini daima sosyolojisinde barindirir. Sosyolojik çözümlemesinin hedefi, tahakküm biçimlerini analiz ederek onlara karsi mücadele etmede araçlar sunmasi bakimindan politik bir anlama sahiptir. Bu çalisma da, Bourdieu’yü politik direnis fikriyle düsünerek ondaki politik özgürlük olanaklarini tartismayi hedefliyor. Onun sosyolojik yaklasiminin bilhassa özgürlesimci bir politikayla ve ulus-asiri bir devletin savunusuyla nasil bir bagi oldugunu göstermeye çalisiyor. Böylelikle, Bourdieu’nün sosyolojisinde politik direnisin nasil bir konuma sahip oldugunu olasi direnis kaynaklarini saptayarak ayrintili bir sekilde ortaya koymayi amaçliyor. Abstract In this study, the concepts of Pierre Bourdieu on the route of sociology and the critical role he attributed to sociology will be tried to be considered with the idea of political resistance. Striving to analyze the origins of inequality in the social world with a relational understanding by breaking away from the traditional dichotomy of objectivism and subjectivism, Bourdieu examines the hidden mechanisms of domination. According to him, understanding the social world is about revealing the forms of domination in this world. A studiously complex analysis of the social order reveals the ways in which forms of domination take place. By undertaking this kind of analysis, Bourdieu reveals how the dominated persons internalize domination. From his point of view, those who are dominated generally obey the founding rules and regularities that engender the social world, with desire to achieve the gains that are the object of struggle, accept the intolerable conditions of oppression and exploitation; but they can also disrupt the functioning of this world. Regardless of the social space, the dominated persons have the means to use a certain power against those in the dominant position. There are always possibilities for them to rebel and apply the forms of political resistance. This study questions to what extent these possibilities, Bourdieu envisioned for resistance and changing in his conceptual framework, can be realized, and whether they can constitute the social foundations of a radical change by creating a disruption in the functioning of the social order. Bourdieu always includes the possibility of political resistance in his sociology, despite all the references he makes to the continuous reporduction of patterns of inequality in the social world. The goal of his sociological analysis has a political meaning in that it provides tools to fight against the forms of domination by analyzing them. Here, this study aims to discuss the possibilities of political freedom in Bourdieu by thinking of him with the idea of political resistance. It tries to show how his socological approach is particularly related to an emancipatory politics and advocacy of a transnational state. Thus, it aims to reveal in detail the position of political resistance in Bourdieu’s sociology by identifying possible sources of resistance.