Human Rights Critique and Political Agency in the Global South through the Perspectives of Alain Badiou

Abstract

This article critically engages with the philosophical perspectives of Alain Badiou and Jacques Rancière, contrasting their affirmative approaches to political agency with the criticisms of human rights offered by Hannah Arendt and Giorgio Agamben. The analysis highlights the limitations of traditional human rights frameworks, especially in addressing complex issues such as migration and displacement. Badiou's ontology, centered on the concept of Event and the 'nomadic proletariat,' provides a compelling framework for understanding migrant struggles, particularly in Brazil, where historical patterns of migration and labor exploitation have shaped the sociopolitical landscape. Similarly, Rancière's theory of dissensus emphasizes the need for political subjectivation to break with the status quo and include marginalized populations. In contrast, Arendt and Agamben critique the intrinsic flaws in human rights discourse, arguing that it reinforces the domination of the nation-state and contributes to the exclusion and exploitation of those considered outsiders. The article concludes that neither existing human rights frameworks nor the critiques offered by Arendt, Agamben, or Derrida's concept of hospitality are sufficient to address the needs of displaced populations. Instead, it advocates for Badiou's and Rancière's disruptive, event-oriented approaches, calling for a radical rethinking of political agency and human rights to meet the global challenges of the 21st century.