Necropolitics and Culture; or the Embedding of Cultural Practices in Necropower
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the burgeoning field of necropolitical studies, priority has been given to the exploration of material practices. Culture is generally regarded either as secondary to these practices or as a set of mimetic representations of necropolitics. In contrast to such approaches, this article contends that the critical gaze ought to be directed at necropower’s production of cultural artifacts meant to achieve necropolitical goals. A theory of necropolitics that does not encompass the necropolitical production and manipulation of culture is insufficient for it fails to give a complete and thorough account of the complex and variegated technologies of necropower. Cultural practices are much more than simple representations of necropolitics or their ideological or theoretical substratum; they also have the ability to subjugate life to the power of death by actively participating in the construction of death-worlds. This thesis is demonstrated by means of an analysis of the interconnection between necropolitics and culture in General Franco’s Spain (1939–75). The adoption of the theoretical standpoint put forth in this article might refine and broaden the field of necropolitical studies. Discussions on necropolitics need to open up to the embedding of culture in necropower. Centred on the analysis of the role of cultural practices within necropolitics, this direction might prove fruitful in future studies for it would reveal, with more precision than the studies limited to analysing the material dimension of necropolitics, the extent, the force, the tools, and the power of coercion of the politics of death.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".