Content area
Full Text
Abstract
I argue that a distinction between three autoimmunities is implied in Derrida's Rogues. These are the autoimmunities of democracy as a regime of power, of democracy to come and of sovereignty. I extrapolate the relations between three different autoimmunities using the figure of the internal enemy in order to argue for an agonistic conception of democracy.
Keywords
internal enemy - stasis - agonistic democracy - sovereignty - the unconditional - biological metaphors
1 The Internal Enemy: Agonistic Politics
If a political theory is to be made out of Jacques Derrida's sprawling oeuvre, the figure of autoimmunity will have to play a central role. Derrida explains the use of this biological metaphor as follows: "Auto-immunization ... consists for a living organism ... protecting itself against its self-protection by destroying its own immune system. As the phenomenon of these antibodies is extended to a broader zone of pathology and as one resorts increasingly to the positive virtues of immuno-depressants ... we feel ourselves authorized to speak of a sort of general logic of autoimmunization."1 The biological metaphor, then, is broadened to include a variety of political phenomena, which is possible because it signifies an enemy. This enemy, however, is not external. It is not a virus or some bacteria. Rather, the enemy is internal and, moreover, it arises out of the system that protects the organism. In fact, it is the protective mechanism that turns against its own body. The internal enemy and protection are two defining characteristics of autoimmunity that play a significant role in Derrida's account.
But why is autoimmunity so important for Derrida's politics? It is certainly possible to argue that autoimmunity belongs to a series of terms such as the trace, the supplement, and différance that Derrida has employed over the years to designate the deconstructive process.2 But it is significant that Derrida opts for the term autoimmunity when talking about deconstruction in the political realm. It first appears in "Faith and Knowledge" in the context of discussing religion. This will inform the political theological presentation of sovereignty in Rogues.3 This theological political aspect is encapsulated in his assertion, repeated in different works, that "a pure sovereignty is indivisible or it is not at all," the reason being that indivisibility "links...