Dietz and Butler's Ideas of Politics (Post #5)

In “Context Is All: Feminism and the Theories of Citizenship,” Dietz explains and criticizes the features of liberalism, Marxist feminism and maternal feminism. Though liberalism may have its flaws, she admits that the feminist alternatives are not viable replacements. For Marxist feminism, she explains, reduces politics to a revolutionary struggle where economic and social equality are the ultimate goals. Dietz argues that while this economic and social equality will bring individual fulfillment, it fails to the capture the polity (or community) of citizens (Dietz, 9). When discussing maternal feminism, Dietz disagrees with the binary argument that men are focused on rights, responsibilities and justice while women are more focused on morals and nurturing. This idea categorizes politics as dominated by masculine ideas of individualism and self-interest. Ultimately, Dietz calls for feminists “to turn to the virtues, relations, and practices that are expressly political, and more exactly, participatory and democratic.” (Dietz, 13-14). This democratic politics should be a “human activity” with community engagement and participation that focuses on more than just societal and economic concerns (Dietz 14). She states that issues of wages, school, family, children, abuse, abortion, etc. should be included as well (Dietz, 15).

Similarly, Judith Butler also calls for democratic politics in “Undoing Gender.” Understanding that people are dependent mortals that can act and be victims of violence, she questions what is considered a “grievable” or “livable”. For those outside the established political framework, their life has been deemed unworthy and consequently are oppressed. Butler explains,

“To be oppressed means that you already exist as a subject of some kind, you are there as the visible and oppressed other for the master subject, as a possible or potential subject, but to be unreal is something else again. To be oppressed you must first become intelligible. To find that you are fundamentally unintelligible (indeed; that the laws of culture and language find you to be an impossibility) is to find that you have not achieved access to the human, to find yourself speaking only and always as if you were human, bur with that sense that you are not, to find that your language is hollow, that no recognition is forthcoming because the norms by which recognition takes places are not in your favor” (Butler, 30).

Consequently, not only does Butler advocate for a democracy that is open to contestation, but also cultural translation (“a process of yielding our most fundamental categories, that is, seeing how and why they break up, require resignification when they encounter the limits of available episteme: what is unknown or not yet known” (Butler,38)). She believes language can drive social change and create an institution that will support different ideas of life. Though this idea of politics renders numerous outcomes, it allows more individuals to enter the political community.