नैन्सी फ़्रेज़र
न्याय को संपत्ति का अधिक निष्पक्ष बँटवारा और भिन्न पहचानों का सम्मान दोनों चाहिए – और एक नहीं, अनेक स्वरों वाला सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र।
पृष्ठभूमि
न्यूयॉर्क की आलोचनात्मक सिद्धांतकार: न्याय के लिए पुनर्वितरण और मान्यता दोनों आवश्यक हैं – और ऐसा सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र जिसमें अनेक “प्रति-सार्वजनिक” हों, न कि हाबरमास द्वारा वर्णित एकमात्र बुर्जुआ क्षेत्र।
मुख्य विचार
- पुनर्वितरण और मान्यता
- अधीनस्थ प्रति-सार्वजनिक
- सहभागी समता
प्रभाव
जिनसे प्रभावित 4
कार्ल मार्क्स
जिनसे प्रभावित
Fraser extended Marx’s move into the ‘hidden abode’ of production to capitalism’s background conditions: social reproduction, nature and political power (‘Behind Marx’s Hidden Abode’, 2014). N. Fraser, “Behind Marx’s Hidden Abode: For an Expanded Conception of Capitalism”, New Left Review 86 (2014); Cannibal Capitalism (2022)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल मार्क्स › 1818–1883
कार्ल पोलान्यी
जिनसे प्रभावित
Fraser widened Polanyi’s ‘double movement’ of marketisation and social protection into a ‘triple movement’ that adds emancipation (‘A Triple Movement?’, New Left Review, 2013). N. Fraser, “A Triple Movement? Parsing the Politics of Crisis after Polanyi”, New Left Review 81 (2013); K. Polanyi, The Great Transformation (1944)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कार्ल पोलान्यी › 1886–1964
मिशेल फूको
जिनसे प्रभावित ✓
Fraser took up Foucault’s analysis of disciplinary power as empirically insightful but normatively confused (‘Foucault on Modern Power: Empirical Insights and Normative Confusions’, 1981). N. Fraser, “Foucault on Modern Power: Empirical Insights and Normative Confusions”, Praxis International 1 (1981); Unruly Practices (1989)
साक्ष्य: Wikidata में भी · Wikidata
मिशेल फूको › 1926–1984
ग्योस्ता एस्पिंग-एंडरसन
जिनसे प्रभावित
In ‘After the Family Wage’ (1994) Fraser drew on Esping-Andersen’s Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (1990) for her anti-exploitation principle, which protects against dependence on employers or husbands. N. Fraser, “After the Family Wage: Gender Equity and the Welfare State”, Political Theory 22 (1994); G. Esping-Andersen, The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism (1990)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ग्योस्ता एस्पिंग-एंडरसन › जन्म 1947
आलोचना
परस्पर आलोचना 2
आइरिस मैरियन यंग ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Fraser objected that Young’s Justice and the Politics of Difference (1990) runs together cultural and political-economic injustice and affirms group differences that justice may require abolishing (1995). N. Fraser, “Recognition or Redistribution? A Critical Reading of Iris Young’s Justice and the Politics of Difference”, Journal of Political Philosophy 3 (1995); I. M. Young, “Unruly Categories”, New Left Review 222 (1997)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Young objected that Fraser’s dual framework of redistribution and recognition splits apart what belongs together: cultural and economic injustice are intertwined in the same structures (‘Unruly Categories’, 1997). I. M. Young, “Unruly Categories: A Critique of Nancy Fraser’s Dual Systems Theory”, New Left Review 222 (1997); reply: N. Fraser, “A Rejoinder to Iris Young”, New Left Review 223 (1997)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
आइरिस मैरियन यंग › 1949–2006
जूडिथ बट्लर ⇄ परस्पर
जिनकी आलोचना की
Fraser objected that Butler’s resignification offers no norms to distinguish emancipatory from oppressive change (‘False Antitheses’, 1991) and treated heterosexism as misrecognition rather than maldistribution (1998). N. Fraser, “False Antitheses”, Praxis International 11 (1991); “Heterosexism, Misrecognition, and Capitalism: A Response to Judith Butler”, New Left Review 228 (1998)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
In ‘Merely Cultural’ (1998) Butler objected that Fraser’s split between economic and cultural injustice relegates struggles over sexuality to recognition, although they concern the reproduction of capitalism. J. Butler, “Merely Cultural”, New Left Review 227 (1998); N. Fraser, “Heterosexism, Misrecognition, and Capitalism”, New Left Review 228 (1998)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जूडिथ बट्लर › जन्म 1956
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित 2
एक्सेल होनेथ
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Against Fraser’s dualism of redistribution and recognition, Honneth argued that distributive conflicts are themselves struggles for recognition, so a single normative concept suffices (Redistribution or Recognition?, 2003). N. Fraser & A. Honneth, Redistribution or Recognition? A Political-Philosophical Exchange (2003; German: Umverteilung oder Anerkennung?, 2003)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
एक्सेल होनेथ › जन्म 1949
ग्लेन सीन कोल्थर्ड
जिनके द्वारा आलोचित
Coulthard applied his objection to the politics of recognition also to Nancy Fraser’s model: recognition granted within a settler-colonial order reproduces that order (Red Skin, White Masks, 2014). G. S. Coulthard, Red Skin, White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition (2014); N. Fraser, “Rethinking Recognition”, New Left Review 3 (2000)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
ग्लेन सीन कोल्थर्ड › जन्म 1974
जिनकी आलोचना की 2
युर्गन हाबरमास जिनसे प्रभावित
जिनसे प्रभावित
Fraser kept Habermas’s public sphere as an indispensable concept of critical theory and carried it beyond the frame of the nation-state (‘Transnationalizing the Public Sphere’, 2007). N. Fraser, “Rethinking the Public Sphere”, Social Text 25/26 (1990); “Transnationalizing the Public Sphere”, Theory, Culture & Society 24 (2007)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
जिनकी आलोचना की
Fraser objected that Habermas’s system–lifeworld split hides the family’s gendered economy and that his account of the public sphere idealises a forum that excluded women (1985; 1990). N. Fraser, “What’s Critical about Critical Theory? The Case of Habermas and Gender”, New German Critique 35 (1985); “Rethinking the Public Sphere”, Social Text 25/26 (1990)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
युर्गन हाबरमास › 1929–2026
कैरोल पेटमैन
जिनकी आलोचना की
Fraser objected that Pateman’s The Sexual Contract (1988) reduces gender domination to a master–subject model and misses its impersonal forms in late capitalism (‘Beyond the Master/Subject Model’, 1993). N. Fraser, “Beyond the Master/Subject Model: Reflections on Carole Pateman’s Sexual Contract”, Social Text 37 (1993); repr. in Justice Interruptus (1997)
साक्ष्य: AI मसौदा
कैरोल पेटमैन › जन्म 1940
कृतियाँ
बुर्जुआ सार्वजनिक क्षेत्र ने स्त्रियों और मज़दूरों को बाहर रखा; लोकतंत्र को अनेक प्रतिस्पर्धी “प्रति-सार्वजनिक” चाहिए।
- 1997जस्टिस इंटरप्टस
पुनर्वितरण से मान्यता तक – और न्यायपूर्ण राजनीति को दोनों क्यों चाहिए।
मत
Fraser’s critique of Habermas’s “Structural Transformation” argued that the bourgeois public sphere was constituted by excluding women and workers, and that democracy needs a multiplicity of “subaltern counterpublics” in which subordinated groups formulate their interests. Her best-known thesis distinguishes two dimensions of justice: redistribution, which addresses economic injustice, and recognition, which addresses cultural status; neither reduces to the other, and the norm uniting them is “participatory parity”, the condition that all can take part in social life as peers. Against Honneth she holds that recognition is a matter of status, not of psychological self-realisation. Later she added political representation as a third dimension.
जीवन और संदर्भ
Nancy Fraser (born 1947 in Baltimore) studied classics at Bryn Mawr and took her doctorate at the City University of New York in 1980. She has taught at Northwestern and, since 1995, at the New School for Social Research in New York, and has held visiting chairs in Paris and Frankfurt. Her debates with Axel Honneth and Judith Butler, and her critique of Habermas, shaped critical theory in the 1990s and 2000s.
अन्य प्रमुख कृतियाँ
- Unruly Practices (1989)
- Rethinking the Public Sphere (1990)
- Justice Interruptus (1997)
- Redistribution or Recognition? (with Axel Honneth, 2003)
- Cannibal Capitalism (2022)
इनमें आता है
नवंबर 2026 तक · स्रोत · इस पृष्ठ को बेहतर बनाएँ · Agora कैसे बना है