Sacrificing Justice
Suffering Animals, the Oresteia, and the Masks of Consent
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6351663 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Stefan Dolgert (0009-0000-8626-6966, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2012 |
| Volume | 40 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 263-289 |
| Publication date | 2012-06-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Political Theory (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0090-5917 • E-ISSN: 1552-7476 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0090591712439302 |
| OpenAlex | W2132333290 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 8 |
Democratic theorists have increasingly turned to Aeschylus’ Oresteia as a resource for challenging the shortcomings of liberal theory, but I argue that this particular return to Greek tragedy should be treated with a healthy dose of skepticism. Defenders of Aeschylean justice have underplayed the sacrificial aspects of his solution to the problem of civil strife, mistaking the consent of the Furies for a resolution that escapes the cycle of violence. Drawing on elements of Greek ritual practice, I contend that Aeschylus folds the consent of the Furies into a sacrificial framework which denies the violence it enacts by directing this violence toward nonhumans. As a consequence Aeschylean justice is complicit in continuing the sacrificial economy it seems to subvert, and Aeschylean politics relies on the suffering of nonhumans (and humans) to secure its conception of order
Business · Democracy · Economic Justice · Epistemology · Order (exchange · Political science · Politics · Skepticism · Social science · Sociology · Tragedy (event · Classical Antiquity Studies · Law · Philosophy · Weber, Simmel, Sociological Theory
| Unique citing works | 8 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,73 |
| Citation span | 2015 - 2024 (10) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 8 |