Articles

Debt and Desire: Differential Exploitation and Gendered Dimensions of Debt and Austerity

Authors

  • Jule Govrin Institut für Sozialforschung an der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21827/krisis.43.1.38816

Keywords:

Austerity, Debt, Desire, Care, Dispossession, Neoliberalism, Authoritarianism

Abstract

Austerity as management of public debt is at the core of neoliberal policies and proceeds as differential exploitation. To explore the gendered dimensions of debt, the paper inquires how debt is bond to desire and inscribed in bodies. After indulging in David Graeber’s, Gilles Deleuze’s and Félix Guttari’s work, the analysis focuses on accumulation through debt and dispossession. Drawing on Verónica Gago, Luci Cavallero and Silvia Federici, it reflects how current economies of debt exploit feminized work in times of authoritarian neoliberalism. The paper sheds light on solidaristic struggles against austerity that manifest a desire for social transformation and economies of care.

Author Biography

Jule Govrin, Institut für Sozialforschung an der Goethe-Universität Frankfurt

Jule Govrin is a philosopher, their research is situated at the intersection of political theory, social philosophy, feminist philosophy, aesthetics, and feminist critique of economy. Their current work is on the political dimension of bodies and embodiment, reading economy as body economic and inquiring feminist protests, practices of care and solidarity, and communal economies in light of radical, relational equality and a universalism from below. They published, among others; Begehren und Ökonomie. Eine sozialphilosphische Studie (de Gruyter 2020) on the entanglements of desire and economy, and Politische Körper. Über Sorge und Solidarität (Matthes & Seitz 20211) on economy, embodiment, and equality in times of the pandemic.

Published

2023-09-08

How to Cite

Govrin, Jule. 2023. “Debt and Desire: Differential Exploitation and Gendered Dimensions of Debt and Austerity”. Krisis | Journal for Contemporary Philosophy 43 (1):25-45. https://doi.org/10.21827/krisis.43.1.38816.