At the heart of affirmative biopolitics, we find the idea that politics is no longer reduced to concerns

around the stabilization of political forms or institutions or alternatively their critique, transformation
and revolution. Instead, what is at stake in Nietzsche’s politics is the very question of what it means to
be human, or, in the words of Foucault, Nietzsche’s politics is a biopolitics, that is a politics that
acknowledges the animality of the human being and ‘places his [the human being’s] existence as a living
being in question’ (Foucault 1990, 143). On Esposito’s view, Nietzsche is one of the first who places the
question of the human being at the centre of his politics when he claims that politics will become ‘great
politics’, that is, a politics that takes on the question of the human being, the question of the human
species in continuity and contrast to other forms of organic and inorganic life. Nietzsche’s great politics
problematizes our understanding of what it means to be human. Here the human is thought against the
backdrop of the totality of life, human, animal, plant and other, and, moreover, is thought as a form of
life that is altered by its relation to other forms of life on which it is deeply dependent. For Keith Ansell-
Pearson, this new conception of the human is also reflected in Nietzsche’s idea of the overhuman
according to which ‘the human is from the beginning of its formation and deformation implicated in an
over-human becoming, and that this is a becoming that is dependent upon nonhuman forces of life,
both organic and inorganic’ (Ansell-Pearson 2000, 177). Despite Nietzsche’s deep concern for the human
and its future, his philosophy is best described as posthumanist. 19 More than any philosopher,
Nietzsche has called for the need to overcome the human, that is, overcome the traditional moral,
rational and political conceptions of the human being that have become completely obsolete and
meaningless. What stands in the foreground in Nietzsche’s posthumanist and affirmative biopolitics is no
longer the exclusion and extermination of degenerate and parasitic life but the affirmation of all life. For
Esposito, affirmative biopolitics is an example of affirmation of life, where affirmation is not ‘the
synthetic result of a double negation [as in Hegel], but instead the freeing of positive forces, which is
produced by the self-suppression of the negation itself’ (Esposito 2008, 102), or, in other words, where
the negative is affirmed as what forms an essential part of life. Affirmative biopolitics thinks the unity
and continuity of the totality of life where ‘no part of it can be destroyed in favour of another: every life
is a form of life and every form refers to a life’ (Esposito 2008, 194). 20 What distinguishes Nietzsche’s
posthumanist and post-anthropocentric perspective is a ‘cardinal point of view’ according to which the
human being is part and parcel of the totality of life: Nietzsche and biopolitics 61 The totality of animal
and plant life does not develop from lower to higher [. . .] but everything, at the same time and on top of
each other and mixed up with each other and against each other [ übereinander und durcheinander und
gegeneinander ]. ( KSA 13:14[133]) Nietzsche advocates the radical interrelatedness between forms of
life which cannot be dissolved into a temporal or a material progression. In a note from the Nachlass,
Nietzsche writes ‘Human beings do not exist, for there was no first “human being”: thus infer the
animals’ ( KSA 10:12[1].95). Analogously, he also questions the very idea of organic life as having a
beginning: ‘I do not see why the organic should be thought as something which has an origin’ ( KSA
11:34[50]). Nietzsche contests the view that life can be inscribed into a linear temporal progression that
distinguishes between qualitatively distinct evolutionary stages. Instead, he insists on ‘continual
transition’ which ‘forbids us to speak of “individuals”, etc.; the “number” of beings is itself in flux’ ( WP
520; cf. KSA 11:36[23]). Given the continuous transition between all forms of life, Nietzsche even rejects
the material distinction between the inorganic and the organic as prejudice: ‘The will to power also rules
the inorganic world or rather there is no inorganic world. The “effect of distance” cannot be abolished:
something attracts [ heranziehen] something else, something else feels attracted [ gezogen]’ ( KSA
11:34[247]). Nietzsche’s conception of the radical interrelatedness between forms of life has influenced
Gilles Deleuze’s idea of the becoming animal of the human being (Deleuze and Guattari 1987, 232–309).
Hence it is not surprising that Rosi Braidotti’s ‘nomadic subject’ bears such a strong affinity with
Nietzsche’s vision of the human insofar as both reflect non-linear, non-fixed, non-unitary forms of
subjectivity that prefer ‘multiplicities and multiply displaced identities’ (Braidotti 2006, 201).
Furthermore, Nietzsche holds that the vegetal and the animal live on in the human to the extent that we
cannot understand the human without considering its relation to the animal and plant life the human
being carries within itself and with which it is inseparably entangled: ‘[t]he human being is not just an
individual, but the continuation of the life of the whole organic world in a specific direction’ ( KSA
12:7[2]). Nietzsche concludes that the whole history of the organic world is active in the human being’s
way of relating to the world. Nietzsche offers himself as an example when he claims to have discovered
that ‘the whole pre-history and past of all sentient being, continues within me to fabulate, to love, to
hate, and to infer’ ( GS 54). Again, Rosi Braidotti’s description of Deleuzian nomadism bears a strong
affinity with Nietzsche’s vision of the totality of life. According to Braidotti’s reading of Deleuze’s
nomadism, ‘[z]oe, or the generative force of non-human life, rules through a trans-species transgenic
interconnection, or rather a chain of connections, which can best be described as an ecological
philosophy of non-unitary, embodied subjects and of multiple belongings’ (Braidotti 2006, 203). The
affirmation of the interrelatedness and interconnectedness of all forms of life and their equivalence is so
important for affirmative biopolitics because it counteracts both the racism and the speciesism found at
the basis of thanatopolitics. Affirmative biopolitics responds to the spurious creation of species both
within humanity and between humans and other animals that characterizes fascist biopolitics by
affirming the continuity between human, animal and other forms of life, thereby contributing to the
pluralization of inherently singular forms of life. Overcoming the barriers that western civilization has set
up between the human being and other forms of life is the objective of Nietzsche’s posthumanist and
affirmative biopolitics. 21 Two examples can serve to illustrate this aspect of Nietzsche’s philosophical
project: first, against the view that value creation distinguishes the human being from the rest of nature,
Nietzsche holds that life itself is the source and origin of values and value creation: ‘When we speak of
values we do so under the inspiration and under the optic of life: life itself forces Vanessa Lemm 62
[ zwingt] us to establish values, life itself evaluates through us when we establish values’ ( TI ‘Morality’
5). Accordingly, for Nietzsche, life is an inherently normative force to the extent that human values need
to be thought of in their relation for and against the values of other forms of life (Lemm 2015a, 2015b).
Second, Nietzsche’s attempt to overcome the barriers between human, animal and other forms of life is
in many ways comparable to the project of critical theory in Adorno, which seeks to undo the biopolitical
domination of nature both within and outside of the human being achieved through the separation of
human life from other forms of life by means of instrumental rationality and representational thinking
(Lemm 2010). Here what counts is establishing the priority of an affirmative relation to nature that does
not centre on the conceptual grasping of an object by a subject. Such a non-dominating relation to
nature passes through the image, rather than the concept. Affirmative biopolitics ‘de-speciefies’ animal
life and this ‘de-speciesization’ passes through the deconstruction of culture and the claim that culture is
something inherently ‘human’ (Lemm 2009). As such affirmative biopolitics closes the abyss between
nature and culture by affirming life as an inherently cultural force exemplified in the cry of youth: ‘Only
give me life, and then I will create a culture for you out of it!’ ( HL 10). On this view, what links the
human being to other forms of life is their inherent creativity. Finally, the success of an affirmative
biopolitics would depend on its capacity to reverse the meaning of immunity. Rather than seeing in
immunity only the potentially destructive protection of life against the other, Esposito speculates
whether immunity could not also be seen as a way for the individual to open up to what is threatening
to him or her in order to alleviate the grip that one’s own self-protection has over oneself, as a way of
protecting oneself from too much protection. Instead of protecting themselves against animality,
humans need to immunize themselves with animality: we need to start to break down massively all the
artificial and spiritual illusions with which we have sought to separate ourselves for purposes of self-
preservation from other living species. An affirmative biopolitics needs to rethink what it could mean to
create a new community with animals and this would entail rethinking the sense in which our security is
based on human animals being predatory and dangerous to other living species.

Title: Affirmative Biopolitics and Posthumanism: Nietzsche's Radical Vision

Introduction:

In the chapter "Affirmative Biopolitics and Posthumanism," the idea of affirmative biopolitics is explored,
focusing on Friedrich Nietzsche's perspective. The central theme revolves around Nietzsche's belief that
politics should not solely concern itself with stabilizing or critiquing political forms and institutions.
Instead, Nietzsche's politics delves into the very essence of what it means to be human, acknowledging
the animality within humanity. This essay will delve into Nietzsche's posthumanist and affirmative
biopolitical ideas, which challenge traditional notions of humanity and advocate for the affirmation of all
life.

The Question of Being Human:

Nietzsche's political philosophy, as described by Michel Foucault, can be understood as a biopolitics. It

questions the nature of human existence, placing the human being's animality at the center. Nietzsche's
"great politics" seeks to understand the human being in relation to other forms of life, recognizing the
interdependence and alteration caused by these connections. Keith Ansell-Pearson refers to Nietzsche's
concept of the overhuman, emphasizing that the human being is intricately linked to nonhuman forces
of life, both organic and inorganic. Nietzsche's posthumanist vision challenges conventional moral,
rational, and political conceptions that have become obsolete, aiming to overcome traditional
limitations.
Affirmation of Life:

Nietzsche's posthumanist and affirmative biopolitics shift the focus from the exclusion and eradication
of degenerate or parasitic life to the affirmation of all life. Affirmative biopolitics, as explained by
Roberto Esposito, frees positive forces by suppressing negation, embracing the negative as an essential
aspect of life. This perspective recognizes the unity and continuity of life in its totality, highlighting the
interconnectedness of various life forms. Nietzsche's rejection of linear temporal progression and his
insistence on the continual transition between all life forms challenge the notion of fixed evolutionary
stages. Furthermore, Nietzsche rejects the material distinction between the inorganic and organic,
asserting that the will to power extends to both realms. Gilles Deleuze's idea of the becoming animal of
the human being, influenced by Nietzsche, aligns with this perspective.

Interrelatedness and Interconnectedness:

Nietzsche emphasizes the inseparable relationship between the human being and other forms of life.
The human being carries the history of the organic world within itself, and the whole pre-history and
past of all sentient beings continue to shape human existence. This view aligns with Rosi Braidotti's
notion of a "nomadic subject" and Deleuzian nomadism, which embrace non-linear, non-fixed, and non-
unitary forms of subjectivity. Braidotti's understanding of an ecological philosophy underscores the
trans-species connections and interdependencies that characterize life. Nietzsche's posthumanist
perspective challenges the creation of species distinctions and promotes the pluralization of life forms
by affirming the interrelatedness of human, animal, and other forms of life.

Overcoming Western Barriers:

Nietzsche's posthumanist and affirmative biopolitics aim to dismantle the barriers imposed by Western
civilization between the human being and other life forms. Nietzsche asserts that life itself is the source
of values and value creation, negating the notion that humanity is distinct from nature based on value
creation. Additionally, Nietzsche's project aligns with critical theory's objective to challenge the
biopolitical domination of nature and instrumental rationality. The priority lies in cultivating a non-
dominating relation with nature, emphasizing an affirmative connection rather than a conceptual
understanding. Affirmative biopolitics counters the racism and speciesism inherent in thanatopolitics,
affirming the continuity between human, animal, and other forms of life.

Reversing Immunity:

An important aspect of affirmative biopolitics involves reevaluating the concept of immunity. Rather
than viewing immunity as solely protective, affirmative biopolitics considers it as a means for individuals
to open themselves to potential threats, releasing themselves from excessive self-protection. Humans
should seek to immunize themselves with animality, breaking down artificial and spiritual illusions that
separate them from other living species. This rethinking of security and the formation of new
communities with animals challenges the predatory and dangerous nature traditionally associated with
human-animal relations.

Conclusion:

Nietzsche's posthumanist and affirmative biopolitical ideas revolutionize our understanding of politics
and the human being. By emphasizing the interconnectedness and continuity of all life forms, Nietzsche
challenges traditional boundaries between humans and other species. Affirmative biopolitics promotes
the affirmation of life and seeks to overcome the exclusionary practices embedded in Western
civilization. Nietzsche's radical vision offers a transformative approach to politics and the redefinition of
what it means to be human in relation to the totality of life.

U poglavlju „Afirmativna biopolitika i posthumanizam“ istražuje se ideja afirmativne biopolitike,

fokusirajući se na perspektivu Fridriha Ničea. Centralna tema se vrti oko Ničeovog uverenja da politika
ne treba da se bavi samo stabilizacijom ili kritikom političkih formi i institucija. Umesto toga, Ničeova
politika zadire u samu suštinu onoga što znači biti čovek, priznajući životinjskost unutar čovečanstva.
Ovaj esej će se baviti Ničeovim posthumanističkim i afirmativnim biopolitičkim idejama, koje osporavaju
tradicionalne predstave o čovečanstvu i zalažu se za afirmaciju celokupnog života.

Ničeova politička filozofija, kako je opisuje Mišel Fuko, može se shvatiti kao biopolitika. Ona preispituje
prirodu ljudskog postojanja, stavljajući životinjskost ljudskog bića u centar. Ničeova „velika politika”
nastoji da razume ljudsko biće u odnosu na druge oblike života, uviđajući međuzavisnost i izmene koje
izazivaju ove veze. Kit Ansel-Pearson se poziva na Ničeov koncept nadljudskog, naglašavajući da je
ljudsko biće zamršeno povezano sa neljudskim silama života, kako organskim tako i neorganskim.
Ničeova posthumanistička vizija dovodi u pitanje konvencionalne moralne, racionalne i političke
koncepcije koje su zastarele, sa ciljem da prevaziđu tradicionalna ograničenja.

Ničeova posthumanistička i afirmativna biopolitika pomera fokus sa isključivanja i iskorenjivanja

degenerisanog ili parazitskog života na afirmaciju celokupnog života. Afirmativna biopolitika, kako je
objasnio Roberto Espozito, oslobađa pozitivne sile potiskivanjem negacije, prihvatajući negativno kao
suštinski aspekt života. Ova perspektiva prepoznaje jedinstvo i kontinuitet života u njegovoj
sveukupnosti, naglašavajući međusobnu povezanost različitih životnih oblika. Ničeovo odbacivanje
linearne vremenske progresije i njegovo insistiranje na neprekidnoj tranziciji između svih oblika života
dovode u pitanje pojam fiksnih evolucionih faza. Štaviše, Niče odbacuje materijalnu razliku između
neorganskog i organskog, tvrdeći da se volja za moći proteže na obe oblasti. Ideja Žila Deleza o
postajanju životinja ljudskog bića, pod uticajem Ničea, usklađena je sa ovom perspektivom.
Niče ističe neraskidivu vezu između čoveka i drugih oblika života. Ljudsko biće nosi istoriju organskog
sveta u sebi, a čitava praistorija i prošlost svih živih bića nastavlja da oblikuje ljudsko postojanje. Ovo
gledište je u skladu sa idejom Rozija Brajdotija o „nomadskom subjektu“ i Delezovskim nomadizmom,
koji obuhvataju nelinearne, nefiksne i ne-unitarne oblike subjektivnosti. Braidottijevo razumevanje
ekološke filozofije naglašava veze i međuzavisnosti među vrstama koje karakterišu život. Ničeova
posthumanistička perspektiva osporava stvaranje razlika između vrsta i promoviše pluralizaciju životnih
oblika potvrđujući međusobnu povezanost ljudskih, životinjskih i drugih oblika života.

Ničeova posthumanistička i afirmativna biopolitika ima za cilj da ukloni barijere koje je zapadna
civilizacija postavila između ljudskog bića i drugih oblika života. Niče tvrdi da je sam život izvor vrednosti
i stvaranja vrednosti, negirajući pojam da se čovečanstvo razlikuje od prirode zasnovano na stvaranju
vrednosti. Pored toga, Ničeov projekat je u skladu sa ciljem kritičke teorije da izazove biopolitičku
dominaciju nad prirodom i instrumentalnu racionalnost. Prioritet leži u negovanju nedominantnog
odnosa sa prirodom, naglašavajući afirmativnu vezu, a ne konceptualno razumevanje. Afirmativna
biopolitika se suprotstavlja rasizmu i specizmu svojstvenom tanatopolitici, potvrđujući kontinuitet
između ljudi, životinja i drugih oblika života.

Važan aspekt afirmativne biopolitike uključuje preispitivanje koncepta imuniteta. Umesto da na imunitet
gleda samo kao na zaštitu, afirmativna biopolitika ga smatra sredstvom za pojedince da se otvore
potencijalnim pretnjama, oslobađajući se preterane samozaštite. Ljudi treba da nastoje da se imuniziraju
životinjskim vrstama, razbijajući veštačke i duhovne iluzije koje ih odvajaju od drugih živih vrsta. Ovo
preispitivanje bezbednosti i formiranje novih zajednica sa životinjama izaziva predatorsku i opasnu
prirodu koja se tradicionalno povezuje sa odnosima između ljudi i životinja.

Zaključak:

Ničeove posthumanističke i afirmativne biopolitičke ideje revolucionišu naše razumevanje politike i

ljudskog bića. Naglašavajući međusobnu povezanost i kontinuitet svih oblika života, Niče dovodi u
pitanje tradicionalne granice između ljudi i drugih vrsta. Afirmativna biopolitika promoviše afirmaciju
života i nastoji da prevaziđe isključujuću praksu ugrađenu u zapadnu civilizaciju. Ničeova radikalna vizija
nudi transformativni pristup politici i redefinisanje onoga što znači biti čovek u odnosu na totalitet
života.