383

citizen?" they ask for example, "Who will Protect our borders?" They
do not care about the concrete worlds sovereigrty destroys as part ol
its constitution or about the dissociation ofthese citizens ftom others
lvith rvhom the,v are governed. My mother lvas trained not to care for
this world either but for the one Promlsed by sovereignt)' to its cili
zens. I care for these worlds, and I'm not alone.
The fascination from imperial sovereignty and the concomitant
negligence ofworldly formations cannot just bë.ountered with alter
native histories w tten by one or severài historians, as I have argued
at length. Unlearning the violent oPPosition that levolutions create
as their liberation story (l consider the destruction of Palestine the
outcome of an imPerial revolution) is a matter of rehearsals with
others, teaching and learning life over violence ("We teach life, Sirl'
is how Ràfeef Ziadeh Put it in 2011:) and performing worldly sov-
ereignty such as Palestinians have perlbrmed, including in refugee
camps ever since the l{'orld they shaÍed with Jews was destroyed
My assumption is that Plior to the destruction oft'orlds and the
imposition of imperial sovereignt)-, different tl?es of sovereignty
existed and sti11 exist and can be reconstructed through rehearsals
with others. \\4lat are these worldly sovereignties that they perform?
\{hat {'ere the sovereiSnties that lvere destro-ved? Asking the question
.what is sovereignt,v?" in à nonimpe alway requires, first, unlearning.

Rehearsals with Others

In The Human Condifion, Arendt refers to theater às "the political

rrt par excellencel" A delineated place-a theater-is necessary, she
àrEiues, for actions to be rePeated, imitated, and played out. Holvevet
the enclosed space she associates with theater is not what makes
theater the political art par excellence. lt is rather the fact that it is the
'bnl,v art §'hose sole subject is n1an in his relàtionship to othersl'1 In
m,v Íeflection on sovereignq',I hracket Arendt! spatial understanding
oflheater and deplo,Y her statement in reverse litics is the thetl
.1rt P ir ercellence.'lhis Íe\eÍsal enables one to replace the demarcated

,,rre
I See Ralèet Ziàdeh,Tca.h Litè, srl' I outube.conrs àrchi!=aKu.?h9xHtM.
3 Hannxh Àrendt, Ti. Hr,rd, Codrior, Chicago: Chicago Unive6jr)' Pre$,
998,I87
.1 Ibid.,188.
384

theatrical space-"the stàge ofhistory" defined mainl,y by the sover The exaltation of the erasire
eignt actions anddecisions as theobject of stud,vof sovereignt,vwith to slip a .ay from the graip oi
a field ofinteractions where actions alwa)-s compete with otheractions symptom of its use as a nonqu
on and off stage. ereigrtyt interpretationr i5 pr
This performative i cstigation beyond the bor:nds of the sov poi{er that r('as materialized in I
ereignt theater requires some rehearsals with others that consist of nition, ofaccouÍting, of interpn
I
questioning the singularity of sovereignty and its operative mecha by Bonnie Honig, deliberarire
nisms. I also seek to imagine camaraderie and alliances with others promise of open ended pohx,::
l,,'ho struggle to make their political engagement with others part of a unitary beginning," bur noni
sovereignty's nleanings. This requires rejecting the terms to which politics:'7 Sovereignty ini oked
sovereignty is oflen opposed, contesting the reduction ofits \.iolence eignty and subjected to mulEl
to the sovereign's actions upon "its" subjects, and rcvening its tempo the term a similar status to rhat
ralitvto imagine its demise not as aprcmise to comebut as that which each usage ofthe term acruall!.
others have already experienced, and made possible. irnd unified.
Sovereigntv, many political philosophers aryue, is an "ambiguous The challenge is not simpk
concept"; it is the foundation and source of authority, an instrument defeated with violence and fie
and argument in internationàl relatiom, a legal entity, a techrology, hislory, but with the help oi È
a normative code, an artifact, an expression of the popular will, the trànsform the nonqualified lbrft
foundation ofthe modern state, a territorially defined entitywith final oring here to configxre so\ereig
decision making power, aÍrd an extramoral and extraprocedural pole. Performances without repla.1ng
Hent Kalmo and Quentin Skinner, editols of an anthology of essays imperial manner of desrrosins
in political theory on sovereignty, describe their book as 'bffering A sovereign power the
dil€rgent but complementary perspe.tives, the chapters as a whole
-in
seek to dispel the illusioÍ that there is a single agreed'upon conceptof a.lr
sovereignty for which one could offer a clear deËnitionl'5 A similar slitutiont that is. it is àssumed r.
àcknowledgment of the myriad facets of sovereignty is expressed in politics.
Robert Iacksont preface to his bookon sovereigntl: -@14-5qJ9lgig!§ assÈ-
onal
Sovereign statehood is a multifaceted and wide'ranging deí $'hich derives from 'the
calls for an interdisciplinary inquirl It is impossible to squeeze the forwhich gn.t
subject into any single academic pigeon-hole, such as historyorlegal the entire governed atioL
studies or political science. None of these disciplines, by themselves,
people ttuouSi
capture thevarious facets of the idea and stàges ofits evolution.6 ated with the idea ofrevolution ar
places, removing poí.eri aEi bu:è
or liberating prisoDers. .\.GÀ;r:
5 Hent Kàlmo and Quenun Skinner, eds., So/,.rgrry,, Ftugnenk: The Paí, desires ofthe man,v rvere perteir.<
Presnt dnd Futrre al d Contesred Corerr, Cànbridge Canbridge Unire^itI Pres,
2013,5.
6 Robert Jèckson, -sore/e,g,tt: Erolution aÍ d lded. M^lden, MÀ: lolity.2007, 7 lonnie Honig, rrrr5.,;; ::i-.
Princeton t'Dlve.sir,v Pres, toi_B I

i-
 385

The exaltation of the e\.asive nature of sovereigÍty ànd its ability

to slip away from the grasp of those seeking to account for it is a
s)'mptom of its use as a noÍqualified concept. The plurality of sov
ereignty\ interpretations is praised, r'hile the recurrent pattern of
power that was mate alized in two hundred sovereign states (ofdefi-
nition, of accounting, of interpretation) remains unstudied. Às aÍgued
by Bonnie Honig, deliberative democratic actorc who \eek out the
promise of open ended political practice ... anchor that pràctice in
a unitary beginning;' but nonetheless marginalize "aconstitutional
politics:': Sovereignty irvoked rvithout qualification-simPly so\cr
eignty and subjected to multiple "ambiguous" interpretations, u'on
the term a simiiar stàtus to that of work or art, archive or citizenshiP:
each usage ofthe term actu àlly reaffirms its transcendence as singular
and unified.
The challenge is not simply to recover other political formations
defeated with violence and the disciplines of political science and
history, but with the help of those other forms and formations, to
transform the nonquaiified form into one among many. I am eÍdeav
oring here to configurc sovereignty out ofactualized experiences and
períormances without replacing il with a totally new concept, in the
imperial m.nner of destroying the existing for the sake of the new
À soveleign power-i n the im erial model is constituted at the
atb ay. That rstood to
have n y been rior to its con
stitutioni that is, it is assumed to be condition of
politics.
--móEs-iqlryjC!§ associated with the e ighteenth centu.y
constitutional narrated as of
autho derives from "the l'The rn u is an idea
íor which monarchic soverei rYas defeated, but it never rrcd to
the entire p n, d
on behalf e people" through the performance ofactions associ
ated with the idea ofrevolution as performed by the man)': occupying
places, removing power's attributes and s)-mbols, redist buting wealth,
or liberating prisoners ActuaI however, the demands, and
desires ofthe many were perceived, Iike the aspirations of free blacks

7 Bonnie Honig, r/.r8er.l Polnis: Pdrd.lo\, L.a\ De»to.rd.), Princeton, Nl

Prin.etón University lress, 2009, .1.
3a6 Potentia I HlstoÍy

or slaves in the colonies, as a dàluerous threat to smàllelites who, in conceived from the bod\ politii
the name of the "peoplel' acted to preserve and institutiomlize the This matters s
principle of diffeÍential rule that was b). no means new not contaiDed within one terri-ic
In his attem to reconstruct the colonial od of exists es and
rvas the outcome of sovereign forma tions beurg :
its with other es and that it 1,,'as through "the opera
tions ofsovereignty in the non European world that tions
red of the to
elgn and ita potentiai Anghie emphasizes the abyss centun hÀ\ I
since the fifteenth
between what sovereigntv represente d for European states: 'an asser mations premised on so.jai_ r€
tion of power and authority, a means by which people may preserve principles through the detach;r
and assert their disrnrctive culture' and for non European peoples: their place in existing fabrj.s a
''sovereignty was the complete negation of poÍ,er authority and tected, and transitory posÍioer.
abyss continued to define the waI non Europeans destruction and manipulation ot
could and attain it nonqualified sovereignr\ and Ix
the b al ofthe non Euro n statesl' of twentieth certurv politi.al rè
thou the 'ichievement of dlv ambi us Havi al de ved num
develo nent, as it involved ation rather the of the societies under
submissio[ to a]ien dards rather th white male s. rvho ruled r
tic identit\']"! Therefore, Anghie distinguishes "the explicit model" actions, sought further
thèt "generated the problem of order among so\.ereign states" from was acquired. The
the one that he develops, rvhich "focuses on the problem of cultural ll'hich
differencel"r The model lies in its 500 yea$ was nonqualjied !
undermine the axiom of order between states as the basis of intei other than an exclusive and drtri
n nal 1à\,Y to fore the sence of colonized p tence of several unequal grous ,
its devel opmeit, às as to understÀnd the ruling.
Ioss tic identi s Different types of polrti.àt to
term). However, it doeso't undermine the univocality ofthe concept teenth centurv for example. n
of so\ereignty itself ànd its identification with 'ïn assertion ofpolver city league and the cit)' stare. Jl€
and authorityl'ir ership, maroon societies in riool
$rith the concept stili nonqualified, &'e are Ieft uith t\{rc problems. shape in resistance to the rlrliEr
First, sove reign conlinues to be understood $'ithin the borders have been continuouslr suplrèri
unit e soverelgn Polr'er, rather than Neither nonqualified so\erersr::\.
conflated with these formatio.i b
8 Anthon,v Anghie, Llpdr,alnn, sot eiytt, a d the Mnkih! ol hto dron.l the representation of"the peori. _
arw, Canrbridgq Cambridge UDiversiq' rrcss, 2007, 106. Thehisto of sovereigntl l! b-r.
r0 Íbid., r08 d troE'-h
r r
Íbid., r()t decides acts. ln I.Lru_s
12 tbid. of struggie between
 347

conceived fÍom the bodv tic ofthe inhabitants of a shared worid.

This matters since un condition, e body politic is
not contained lvithin one territory identiÍied with those in but
eÍists and
sovereign formations of being in the pole of
and au asP óltical forma-
tions t èred to
to bi ànd define it. The systematic destruction unleashed
since the fifleenth century has knocked down existing sovereign for-
mations premised on social, religious, cos ological, and political
principles thrcugh the detachment of individuàls and groups from
their place in existing fabrics and their placement in net', ulpro
tected, and transitory positions. I propose to see in this laÍ8e'scale
destruction and manipulation ofthe body politic a major element of
nonqualified sovereigntv and rol a new and unprecedented feature
oftwentieth centuÍy political regimes such as Nazism or apartheid.
Having alr destr cal s es and placed
s of the societies u[der their au tho ty, p groups of
white males, $,ho ruled
actions, fuíther r th
was acq Th sha could
iom rvhich uld no poinl in
500 vears $'as qualified sovereignt in tended to be anllhing
other than an exclusile ànd differential form, bnsed uPon the exjs-
tence of several unequal grcups of subjects, subiected to differentiai
ruling.
Different §pes of political formations eristed Prior to the eigh-
teenth century-for example, indigenous confederucies, the Haisa
city ieague nnd the citv state, the Igbo system of pa.ticipatory lead-
ership, maroon societies in rvoods and on hills, fbrmations that took
shape in resistan.e to the imperial sovereignt,v. These formations
have been continuously suppressed and dismissed as unsustairable.
Neither nonqualified sovereignty nor popular sovereignty should be
conflated with these íormations, {'hose heterogeneily is irreducible to
the Íepresentation of "the peoplel'
Thehisto of sovereignty is written mosd as an idealized account
of an idea as concei ectil.e of a sove(ei who
decides an acts. ln at I configuie sovereignty storY
óf struggle bet$,een t$'o forms of , lmperla 1d$
 388

Imperial sovereignty consists of and manifests itself through ruling monopolies and technologi.s. i
apparatuses, with minimum connection to Írorldly activilies, which nition and respect of the land.
it tends to destroy or replace by extractive, productive, and computà àssiduously transmitted a.ross
tionai activities required for its or!.n operations. Mrl that this knowledge imposes on ,
rcfen to the and formations of sovereignty-the comnlandine :
in the world, shaped by and throu intimate knowle ofthe world
and its s ecrets, o its natural, spiritual, political, and cosmo
logical ta-{onomies preserved and transmitted o\.er generations and Reheo$o|1. Democrocy is not o t
shared among those entitled and invested to protect them. Imperial
consists of the massive exprop riation of lls s IfArendtt endeavor in Origi... i
astot m rÍable su di v
I political constellations "$h€neri
politic. worldl so\-ereignty .onsists of care for the
which one's lace among o sls e worldt texture. tical
activities and irr; cible to the pole ofdomi ati a Net' World
nation and powe! worldly sovereignty is not considered sovereignty at In the early 19.10s, before the;
all, neither bythe imperial powers that desiroy it norbythe discourse plans was fullt revealed, _{rendt s
of political theory. T eed to reconfi .e world formations in an immediate response ro the per
termsof ot motivated by a wish to enrich the discourse t'as declared over and the
of the th but rather to rccognize it d Prcvlolts
the insuch of violence on
the rcle cherishes. An ln explor ation and made anti SeEl1
a8 ainst accumulation and study. Perplexed bythe possib r§
of nd by the occurrence of someÈrne .
Ío Prctect shared worlds ftom destructi\e im erial she assigned herselfa histori.ai er
The I their imperiàl right to transform their subjects from the 1878 Berlin conferen.e anC Lhr
dwellers oftextured worlds into flimsy political actors in the theater she was bythis transgression of a..

of imperial sovereigntl,,. unprecedented. In this im perial ,

Part of the rec of worldl y sole consists of aeheafials ered the uns able molement s
others, who are m their a ned olitical roles nl arianism] rose to
(such as citizens, 8e es, and so on), as well as from oiitical institutions an,i dè
the \ery lery ivi tical Dersonrs. which some ical traditions e categon oa
politjcal acton are interpellated to inhabit (such as the conscientious knew that human atTairs could no
objector, the socialcritic, the "refusni('or the leader). Such a recovery ofprogress:
is based on rel.iving repressed forms ofshaÍiog the world and exercis-
ing commoning rights in it. A familiar form of this recoveq', which
may be observed across the world, from Pàlestine to Tanzania, from 13 On the exposlon of +:
hei.td.-
Nigeria to Guatemaia, is the resistance to monocultures and the estab zcera, "wihess oii..<
The Seed eueen
lishment of local seed libraries shared by farmers, seeking to enable l1 Hlnnah Àrcndl, rreor,a.r .jr
197s, !161 {italics added)
indigenous people to Íegain control over the lands from corporaÍe l5 Ibid.,,,60.

7
 389

monopolies and technologies.'r Worldlv sove is in the

nition and ect of the hndt needs oíth; of the land,
assiduously transmitted ac.oss generàtions, and of the limitations
that this knowledge imposes on one ofthe majorweapons of imperial
sovereignty the.ommanding power of gror,,.th for gro$'thi sake.

Reheorsoll. Democrucy isnot a regime oport

IfArendtt endeavor in Origins of Totalitarionism was to identiry the

political constellations "wheneveÍ these be.ame Í/ul/ totaiitàrianl"a
task is to as thàt which .ondÏions
tical re since the colonization th the cre
a New World.
In the early 1940s, before the catastrophe oftheNazi extermination
pians was fuIly revealed, Arendt started her study ofanti-Semitism as
an immediate response to the persecution ofthe fews. \\'hen the war
ared over and the sc e ofthe catast could be
it chàllen Prevrous rs about the Iausibili ty
of violence on a scale. Arendt extended the framework of her
exploration and made anti'Semitism one of the three pillar of her
study. Perplexed by the possibilitythat the "abyss ... had opened" and
by the occurrence of something "that ought not to have happened,"
she assigned herselfa histo cal exploration into the consequences of
the I878 Berlin conference and the colonization ofAfrica. Shocked as
she wàs by this transgression ofacceptability, she kneiv it was not tnrly
unp recedented. In this erial ion into Afti.a she discov
ered the unst le mo\-ement she equated with
it ltotalitarianism ] rose to "it devel ert v
oliri cal institutions and all so and polit-
ical traditions category of the new tormented her since she
that human affairs could not be subordinated to the time lire
ofprogress:

t3 On lhe expdsion ofhenloonr seeds shared by lalesrinian fàrners, see Ala-

zeerè, "Urirness: The Secd Queen of Palestrnei' A1j ake.à.com, December lo,2018.
1.1 Hdnah ÀÈndt. TÀc Orlgbr aÍTatdlitaridni:n,Aiàído, FL: À Hà(en Bóok,
1975, 4ól (itàLi* àdded)
 391

Reheorsal 2. Sovereignty is tted ucible to the soveteign

(loesn't a.t in à world void of othe.s. and his àctions

do not carpet r othe$
how orvertul, le ilèss the sor.ereignt actions are, they
are carried out by other actoi visible, strong
to pursue its actions or rot, complicit ol n ot, all
leadi to the outcome int sovereign or 11()t
is grasped as an open process, the sovereign cannot be kePt
on stage, gi\.ing a monologue, àcting upon others who are made into
his victim spectato.s not a centralized
ds from the to borders, coÍtrol the interior of
rule its tion, set
càrried out. The is all,Ëys one among rnany actors
rn the theater of and does
outcome of its man
is associàted wilh territorial closure. Not on is this
a late its ce enables us to see
s not as territorial limits but aa strument mobi-
ized for tion tv
ud of the bal fabric of or,!'er out of $'hich it e
ical concepts, international

and ns, im
.; al al ns of a dormant
: nations that reach their thÍough this nonqualiÍied so\.
...iqnt\'. In a world storme m,t
. r:entialnation-state is already necessarill mixed such that the decla-
_r::Ljn of sovereignty as a form ofself-determi[ation actually requi(es
--. \iolent distilling of a cohesive "self" out ofthe local population,
: :cLf" in the name ofwhich independence can be won or granted
lqainst this background ànd that of tÍans Atlantic slavery anil
' _:ed migràtion, a certain cohesiveness ofthe term "people" loses
, :r.rning, so l propose to turn the definition ofsovereignty upside
,1 Rather than studying the tv,'
tion ,n a grÍel terriiory lvhose history

. (ln the complex geograph-v ol empircs ànd soltreignties,see lauren Btnton,

. '::'.í s.t.t.ignry: Lat dtd GeogaPht ih Etrcledn EnPir3 1l0a t90a c7n
::. r àrrbridgcUniversit! Pre$, 20r0, 12.
392

is actually narrated teleologically, I to int argues, ir offers that as a -hE!I

from irÉrur. as another netlvork of sovereiSn tion of horr riorre
ties and $hose emergence is not expression of their civil status. r: or
ocal tions tof form the limi
interests, discourses, apP aratuses, inve§tments, ln th ose $'ho $,ere preyiou slÍ È\.1-r
his genealogy of the idea a governa le world- Gnd nor of tze rhe drtr
through nature, but bymen'-Mark Mazolr'er argues that "the germi_ undertook rrere from ihat mo
nation of the idea ofthe 'inteÍnational constitutes a separate zone of erial definition of
political life with its owl1ru1es, norms, and institutions:'1e
The "internationau' this governable world, formed through colo ítor example) the suffragtlr str
nialism, deportation, and enslavement is not, I argue, a zone aPart rial it
from political life whose calamity could be abolished without con- tical st s and iormad(t
sequences, but the very condiÍion for the constitution of sovereignt) itics is in general. In thi! jdn
worldt'ide. :ntutian oÍ the Rights ot \\'o1.,nE
-rerformance of a "hlperboirc ;
lrruggle for nondifferenrial .:::
Rehearcal 3. In co m fi e ns u rcble ex p e i e n ce s :nodel to the so\-ereignb be,rg
ihèse Íruggles sought mu.h mol
The incommensurability ofthe experience of different grouPs go\ fhe incessant
erned differentially is the pojnt ofdeParture for numerous alternati\_e maintenance is ob\iori Tl
histories. Each ofthem is an attemPt to rehearse $ith others some deti' :on \shite. non-Chrisrian
ations from scriPted imPeriai scenes, seeking to prevent imperialisms :odern citi hi e sttli À..d
teleological completion. Te such as s,]à and in bli
dsí a, d ec o n sft uctíon, thir à ::esumably factual realrtrer aai
and ed to account fo1 ':er marks in the use ofthe-;
that were otherwise ssed. Yet for these but rather that ;rnzi
s to transform uali ::.:qnfl'and are defined hr r:
them not as recove red moments in a progressive histbrybut rather ':::onal ca tegor y and a per:<rn r:
p articipato rs in an incessant rehearsal until these n fied cor ial te.hn(.lo
such as citizenship nd so that the Plu ral h!rm;:: :;:.:orv Personas are not dèlral
_
-aal must conlinuouJ!:ii eaa
Given that the i mp erial technology of sovereign oP emtes throLi!: :..irtical theorisrs are nLr: ::-
ofcitizenshi P, - .:3iqn or inÍasi|e pore. :1--
Citi \{'as conceived, \\re are told, as a universal form and her::
can be claimed by anyone, at least inp alr:.*
: .rr $e D€da.ar1oD r à.i-a
.-- i:: i: i1i0 ao,,ei r:.- :.. i_.rr:
::- : \u.r..{bingdon o: a:-À :
19 Mdrk MaTo$eÍ, Gote/ring the \votli: The Httótf aJ an Íde.. \e\ : l.rnfe de (;.usc! ::.i-j;: -
Pcnguin Pre$,2012, 15. : i.- : :don o.topuj pu.t !: :. :.:
 393

argues, it offers that as a " erbolic tion:'ro lfthis is an accu,

ràte d tion of how women and of color succeeded in
ch their civil status, it omits the fact that acquired citizenship
imited o stru
thosewho1acre previouslyexcluded. In theconstitution
rn different it ruggles mar izéd people
undertook were I;onr that moment ordinated tó
ition o P lionship e Soverne dto
s, $'ithout restim
suffragists those r given by lmPe
rial it forms ofu.omeí sparticip
litical i ànd formations, as well as th what
polrhcs is in seneràI. In this sense, reading Olympe
de Gouges's Dec-
laration oí the Rights oÍ Womdn and oí the Fenale Citizen only as Íhe
peri-ormance of a "h
)?erbolic proposition' deprives some womeni
struggle for nondifferential citizenship of its status as a competing
model to the sovereignty being imposed on them_:r In fact, some oi
these struggles sought much more.
The incessant obal violence uired for citizen
§h maintenance is obvious. The categories that mainly
non-white non Christian
modern citizen still used common in the press, in Ian :
and as ordin gn refe to
and tion
other mark in the is not prgof that a "
is a refu but rather that citizeni are the effect differential sov
and are deffned it. sion ofa
fict ional cate and a person is not a indil.idual co
but erial technolo cv vows its own violence
categor).-pemonas are not design at is but are reiterations
ofwhat must continuousl),be enforced il1 order to exist.
Political theo sts are not immune from ressing the voice of
sovereign or \.e pol,\,et even lvhen they posr f

20 On rir Declaratbn asa hperbolic propositio., see ltienne Batibar, .Ciuzen

subie.tl' in WàD Con.s aÍer Ée Sul,ie.rl eds lduarö Cad.va, peter Conner, and
Jeèn ltrc Nanq., Abi,rgdon.on ThaDres, UK: Routledg., I 991, 52.

_ 2r Olynpe
(liiizer,
de cougs, Decldrntion oÍ the Rights ol ttonan ond aJ the Fendt.
toDdon: o.topus publrhing Croup, 2018.
394 Potentia I History

is said to legitimize rule de..r

colonized i they may in fact be even more at risk than other
that a given people is or \rÀ. j
rs. What Leela G aÍdhi describes as the 'tffort to break from
legitimate.r5
Europe ifonly for the sake of Europei'r: can be read, for example, in
Fanon's account ofAlgeria's anti colonial libeÍation movement: If$€
Not onl is this uÍified
wish to reply to the expectations ofthe PeoPle ofEurope 1...1 e must
'bdd and daogerous thesis prev
turn oveÍ a nelv leàf, we must work out à ne$'set ofconcepts, and try
as the idea of a "unified peopi,
to set afoot a new mànl'?r Às Fanon's hasis on the "new" shou's
powe r is at work "peÍsuades individuÀls lo luPP
us, the inabili to which kind of
k in rclatior to the ernmentl':6 Instead. Espeio
means thateven anti-imPe aiist criti.ism st -r\
gn power must let of our relations rial sov- I becomi
idea because ng rhe
ty toge
* them from raat ib
ln he n ofpolitical philosophers' moral and political pre
c9 ined, first in the h h.n.ai
occupations with the category of emergency, wher trying to àns$'er
"lvhen itis permissible totorture, detain without habeas coryus ghts,
in the constitutionli ular

deport, use rendition, or invade a countr,vl' Bonnie HoniS lÍrites:

t
Despite her efforh ro qualó

One worry is that we contribute to tbe very account of sovereigntv

! rei .ent the people gets .èu!:hi
ical philosophy, namel) r-rtui
we mean to oppose: If we ask what rule§. pÍocedures, norms, or
'A justiflcatory democrarl. È.
consideràtions ought to guide or constrain thedecision that inÍokes
can coherently claim that a dèr
emerge.cÍ l!'e ma,v think r e constrain or limit sovereignt)-and '§e
itself. and for this reason. .an .
may indeed do so I...lburwe also adoPt a certain kind ofsovereign
focusing mainl
perspective and enter iDto the decision.r'
r terms in s hr.h r
n'e can learn that reth
The challe e with worl
in the vio lent u'orld imperiallogic
rough Gcommensurable
do we begin to p otentialize e Yiolent didnt do much to Íevise thÈ i.
and
ustil-l càtion :,r
ing her
Partjall)', is the $,ork of qualiÍving our concePts an d identiiing /rlr, the theory reqr.r ires .. 'Tl
p
the imperial\t-ork màn)'ofthem do. For example, Paulina Ochoa EsPejo
Ilear the traces not on
tackles the category "peopld' in denrocratic theory and claims that
of the colonial e and lial:
lor a long time politi.al ilèoi
in these arguments, àll individual wills in the community be'one
and colonized states \§ere rrei-
a popular $'iil when they àgree, and onl)'the resulting unified $ill

22 leela (;andhi and Deborah Nclson (guest editor) lditors Íftroductiori

T'ansformationl, :5 PauljnaO.hoa EJfdi r',: .-
[spe.ial ssuc] Àround r948: lnterdjs.iPlinàn APProtr.he§ ro Globèl ir ::::
o.rdri.51ate, Univcrsil) Pa:L
CÍiticdltnq irf 10:1,2014,245 91.
26 Ibid,3.
l3 Frdtz l'.non, IlL i{i"rcrtd o/ rÀe Errrl tràns. Ri.hdrd ?hil'or [196]l \ew 2: Ibid., it1.
Yorh Grolc Pres, 200.1, 255
28 Ibid.,2t(ndI.sidne.
24 Honig, !m.rg.,.t P.lir!f,,l.
 395

is said to legitimize rule democraticdly [... ] Hence, it hàs to show

that a giYen people is or r€s unified in order to prove that à state is
legitimate.:5

Not is this unified nonenistent, Espejo es. but this

dd and dàngerous prevails in the history o political thoughti
as the idea of a "unified people'has such a "rhetoricàl force" that it
"persuades individuals to support a particular cause, Ieader, or gov
ad, Espejo oses to think about the in their
becomin what eople asa ?his is a c
in dvnamic oerformance di
the peo
thenl from lon rait ch amcter that concept p1.
first in the othetical ts
in the constitution of popular sovereignty rh

Despite her efforts to qualily the concept, her eifort to theoreticàlly

reitr.ent the people gets caught in some ofthe faniliar rraps ofpoiit-
ical philosoph)-, namely justification, iegitimàrior, and foundation:
':{ justificatory democratic theory that rests on process philosophy
.an coherently claim that a democratic people creates itselfand rules
rtsel{ and for this reason, can claim that the people is sovereigrj', In
term, "the peoplel' Espejo leaves untouched a
cl terms in which it ia as "rulel'From this,
\'e can learn thàt retheó nzlng sm e concePts is rot en
imperialiogic. ofthe leasa fhal v
didnt do much to e the if the
dete ustification for ruli em is that tojrsrr,
t//e, the theoryrequires -.."r3 Thus again, when Espejo writes that "the

hear traditional theory, also an

ofthe.olonial and tràp: 'Is this people itself?" t
I;or a I ong Ume politi€al theory thia a sophic quest
and colonized states were ineluctably approached as ifproviding the

25 laulina Ochoa lspel o, ? lt. I nn. 4 Poprlií Sater.{nLt: Ptods\ dnd the Dem-
r;rdr.Stàte,UnilersitvPèrk,P,{rPennsvlyani.StareUnitrsiryPress,u0ll,l2.
26 Ibid,3
2r- lbid., 171.
:8 lbid,27 (italts added).
meàning Europeans:'r: It is this reserve of right that makes it almost body politic Lr
inpossible ibr citizens to recognlze themselves as acring nnd interact- riàl soïerei
irg with others in the same theater of so\-ereignh' and to àckrowledge acts in the centuries of saltlere!
lhat it is their role and actions that enable a catastrophe from n'hich indi ous nassàcÍes, ethnr.
they imagine themselves relati\€lyprotected. I'11return to rhe question trànslèrs ofp
ofrights io the ne-\t chapter r,v as constitutive oilh(1r
Dati
Her€ is
Thesis 2. Diffetential sovereignty requires double inougural octs atively smallgroup, some ol \hr
themselves "foundiig iither!_ o:
Soverei ty never erupts mir aculou . and its the,v will be able to force ur..:r i
v of its declaratio it does is t this ase th use Íiolenae àÍ
fou tion mr hof qu alified soverei gnty that hi1 the number of eop
hicà f rÀat sovereignty ts informed by qles,
us yrn pe
unlearl]ed, the constitution ó elgnt,v eme as a long others, the "founding
pr ich violence is agàinst .ient number of
other existin g of so\-erei to elimirate th àrticipate in violen.e
ergnt,v ental condition of tic d. Thoie r
It took à few
"-fiïh
r and disemporer ot drahed to reàffiÍm assi gned roie
the wor T struggle
and it is re gnty could not can[ot be :hat fioment on, those NhLr h.
eràdicated :hvsicall,v or synbolicallv er:'el
B declaring its o$n enistence, diíferential detaches :1ot allo$.ed to transgress th.r. a
itself m as part itr a double inau' :rembers ofthe bodr politr;. nr
ral acl. rst is the impairment o existing olitical, social, ri unchange able. fhe pun
them protective worldly tissues -nmlgr ants" diddt start lodèr, _
arnong l'hich people co e red :lL»r an infi tr
.u:. .hJt th!v repre,enr lor otner,. lhr. ruin ion i, o((luded and , hen tears are shedl"!
ke t outside ofthe im physically circumscribed rei The dissociation of di11..è::r
territor): and clo inaug ural act ofviolence dif - racilitatL'd bI anotheÍ m\1:: ,r
ferentiates pe e into distinct groups, ea $'ith its -'l,ased on n fabricated ..n:e-:
lack and c e iiolence exercised th 1È and a liberàting one. F-,'.r. :
rh gural acts can have different ::.rtion olthe state ol Isrie.. l!:
fa tion of a diftèrentiated
:jrgenous peoples
8t Geràld Honrc, The Cotnter Rerolltia of fai6: SIL*. Re\ist.n.e nnd the
OÍigits o[the UntedSta?s aJÀ»./i.r, NcN 1'ork Ne] lbrk Lrilersitv press,201.1,
9l .! 4a,,,.à,,., IDI \Le.il1 i ::
 423

hud\ DolrtiL. Lh learni the swiftness of the constiturio n of impel

rial in order cloub ral
,r.ts in the centuries ofscattered ljolence caused ensla\€men t,
:ndi ous massacres, ethnic cleansin . cultural dest.u.tion and
again and n since th€ fifieenth
as constitutive ofrh; ties, the

Here is ks. lhese h\,o inaugural acts are pursued bya rel
.:\'elvsmall group, someoflvhom acquire enough po\rerto designate
::emseli es "founding fathers" ofà certain djfferenrièl sovereignty that
.v lt,ill be able to force upon rhe ruins ofwoÍlds rhe,v desrroyed. In
use violence, amon other means. in order to exter
1{ho must Íp
1n ich
e sor-ereign sub Through their differentiatlon from

Those who are cast in the role ofciti

::.rhcdto reafflrm ass igned roles, to
uard the ed w and order. From
:rr n1oment on, those who were declared outside the y Poliric,
: .\iicallv or symbolically expelled liom the demarcated terÍitorl, are
.t àllorved to transgress their assigned statusi citizens, the priÍileged
-::mbers ofthe body politic, musr àlso recognize rheir place and role
.. .lnchangeable. The nishment ofcitizens who dar€ to "ille
rants" didnt start toda "it is inconceivable thàt :r soldier r.orrld
: rir àn irfiltra is
..n tears are shedl'rs
Ihe dissociation ofdifferential sol.ereigntv from irs o\\.n violence
:a.ilitated bv anothcr m,vth: liberation from foreign rule. This mlrh
rried on a Íàbricated contest bet\leen t$'o ruling pou,ers, a vicious
.. and a lib€ratlng one. Fron'r the Àrnerican Revolutior through the
:.rtion ofthe state of Isràel,lib
nt against
:rgen0us peoples.

r! ad a.ldr.. lDI weekhl op ed, Norenrber t9,19.

424

In this m)'th of liberation, the smallest group and the one that is first Congress in 1790 enacted a D?
less subordinated to this foreign rule, lvhose members paticipate in ship relativel). simple to attain-fo
the goveming structures and enjoy multiple privileges and the power ParadoxicallÍ the lovalt\ of th
to doninate others, exercises violence to become an actor on the engagement in this dangerous reY.
international stage, t'here only imperial sol.ereigns are authorized by prise was achiel.ed through a srII
internationél law to participate in the scramble for the world. sla\€s if they s$,itched sides dunn!
The dissociation of the foundation of the United States in 1776 whites, since thet rvere alread! 'ó
from slavery rvas never a giveni it al$'ays provoked resistnnce, and promise meant more freedom. Of1
its danger to the monopoly of differentiai sovereignty could not be in comnloÍ or it does not e\is!
fu1ly eradicated- The violence ofthe slave trade provided the colonists pro\-ide free persons with more tre
with free labor but also deÍined the constitution of the body politic of that is, under dilfeÍential sove reigD
which they u'ere à part. The large number ofAfricans or Americans is hence not a mimculous aat- bu
of African desceDt $'as profrtable but also dangerous. According to violent iÍaugnral acts exened upor
Gerald Horne, the Stono slave rebellion in 1739'ttruck terror in rhe irill soon become the theater r.h.
hearts and minds of settlers, solidifying the perception that though Thc declaration of sover t1 trà
enslaved Africans ivere necessary for development, their preseoce was that at least art of the violenae re
dangerous and they must be even more brutally oppressed:'3e rule will be exercised throu
Brutal às the modes of oPpresslon àgainst slaves were, thev lvere is declared and itsviolen.e !
to eliminate d of revolt a d sP ared the burden ofbrutalllo
ic "solutioni' were ired. The increase in the number M it is no\r alreadv e
of within the body politic was one of then Howe\.et as Derek tures that they operate, man' oi th
Heater argues, "English regulations on naturalization were tighter
than the colonies would have $'ishedl'and their search ofother ways
'bf dodgjng Inglish regulations was for coloniàl Assemblies to pass :hesis 3. Citizens' complicity must t
thei. olvn Àcts:"" Though in 1773 the British government banned
such "impertinent procedures much to the colonistt anger" as Heater aor the enrnit,vamong diftèrent st
writ€s, this ban was not meant to abolish the differential body politic :ral shutters have to click shur. r
but to protect it in a different way. In response, British subjects in the .ilPear to be disconnected ralher
colonies $'ho expressed loyalty to the king and impeded others irom citizens adminisrered br
passing these acts were declared traitors and were expected to emi and visi § to à,
grate from the country. Their subtraction liom the body politic $as to rtiÀ] .-
be balanced rvith more Iuropeans (not necessÀrily British), who lr'ere
incentivized to immigrnte to the colonies in America bv the promise
of"freedom:' Demographic manipulation could not but proliferate for .:nd hol\' citizen
making differential sovereignl.rr possible. As Heater describes, "The .r.r words, the difËrential bod\
Prn
pels its members Io
89 Horne, Tlre Corrr.r Àe/olutio oí1i76,112.
90 Derek Heater, À nri{His,o/, oÍCi.,zfldr,r, Ne{ York: New York Uniletsir.v
ri Ibid.,2.19.
 425

t-irst Congress in 1790 enacted a natumlization rule that made citizen

ship relatively simple to attain-for Europeans:el
Paradoxicalll., the loyalty ofthose "free white persons" and their
engagement in this dangerous (e\-en though profitable) colonialeDter-
prise was achieved thÍough a similar promise of freedom given to
rlaves ifthey srvitched sides dudng the "libemtion war.,, In the case of
Nhites, since they were already "free" in the language of the era, the
pronise meantmore Ëeedom. Ofcourse, freedom exists as a resource
rn common or it does not exist for alli the ody treaty that could
rrovide ftee pe$ons with more freedom was at the expense ofothersj
:hat is, under differential sovereignry The proclamation of sovereignty
:i hence not a miraculous act, but a secondary phase, preceded by
:iolent inaugural acts exerted upon different àctors lvho inhabit what
"ill soon become the theater where sovereignty is to be proclaimed.
Ihe tion of ures violence and
:iàl at Ieast of the violence re quired for maintàinin differential
:rle $'ill be exercised ti
is declared itsfi is institutionalized, citizens are theD
.ràred the burden ofbrutall others theyshare
d,M ofit
alreadyembedded in theinstituti
is
:res that they operate, many ofthem in the name oflaw and order

'.esis 3. Citizens' complicity must

beextrocted

:r: the enmity àmong dlfferent groups to seem natural, endless impe
_
:: shutters have to click shut, makilg different types of violence
::reàr to be disconnected rather than contiguou against
::t!i1 citizens administered the mp arable in its
.:-.pe, brutali aÍdvis to the of violence inst
noncitizens or artial citizens. Hon'ever withoDl
.:;e, for
necessarv viduals in the
'::Lme could not be re produced. Part this must be to under-
:id how citizen, roduced an made it. In
the differential bod olitic cannot be uced if all
roups, bject to the vio-
Pels its me represent

tr Ibid.,2.19,