ABSTRACT
Over the past decade the emergence of social death theory has offered a new approach to the study of genocide. This paradigm contends that genocide takes place not only as physical violence, but as the destruction of social bonds, vitality, and worlds. Championed by the late philosopher Claudia Card, social death theory offers an alternative to the dominant focus on killing in the analysis of mass atrocity. However, critics of social death theory argue that this approach focuses on immaterial differences and ideas rather than concrete forms of violence. This chapter argues that part of the value of the social death paradigm is the capacity to politicize forms of biopolitical and necropolitical violence that defy orthodox images of genocide. Drawing on the work of Catherine Malabou, it contends that the forms of social violence described by social death theory actually have material effects that exceed loss of identity. Indeed, Malabou’s theory of plasticity illustrates that the divide between material and symbolic life, and therefore material and symbolic violence, is founded on an artificial, biopolitical division. The article demonstrates that understanding mass violence in these terms is critical to addressing the biopolitical imperatives that structure contemporary genocide prevention.
