Commoner subjectivities emerge historically through practice rather than being fixed identities.

Evidence

The framework uses the Foucauldian concept of subjectivities, denoting something that is historically constituted through practice, and changes in different contexts (Kelly, 2013). The framework sees subjectivity and subject formation as central to the process of commoning, in line with the critical tradition of commoning theorists who emphasise the relational nature of commoning (De Angelis, 2017; Velicu and G. García-López, 2018; Nightingale 2019), albeit without undermining the importance of commons as resource. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 47

Categorization

• DEFINE: Clarifies Foucauldian subjectivities as historically constituted through practice, central to the framework’s theory of how people become commoners.
• corroborated: 5 independent passages support this claim — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 47
• XREF: connects to: Commoning should be analysed through internal and external dynamics among subjectivities, visions and practices. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 6; Becoming a commoner, visions, and social practices shape each other cyclically — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 38; Subjectivity forms through practice, not prior to it. — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning:…, 85 (+5 more)

Related

• Becoming a commoner, visions, and social practices shape each other cyclically (similarity 0.87)
• Social practices drive ongoing formation of commoning subjects. (similarity 0.87)
• Commoning should be analysed through internal and external dynamics among subjectivities, visions and practices. (similarity 0.86)
• Commoning practices simultaneously produce group relations, member subjectivities, and material culture. (similarity 0.85)
• Subjectivity forms through practice, not prior to it. (similarity 0.84)
• Commoning simultaneously shapes and is shaped by its practitioners (similarity 0.82)
• Members’ class and racial identities shape how communities do commoning. (similarity 0.81)
• Commons governance proceeds through a fixed cycle of subjectivity, vision, and practice. (similarity 0.80)
• Commoning communities vary with context and adapt over time. (similarity 0.80)
• Commoning practices vary with each commons’ unique context, aims, membership and culture. (similarity 0.79)
• Commoning transforms participants’ identities even as it embeds practices of power and difference (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Subjectivity forms through practice, not prior to it. #corroborates (0.95) — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 85
• Social practices drive ongoing formation of commoning subjects. #expands (0.90) — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 94
• Commoning practices simultaneously produce group relations, member subjectivities, and material culture. #corroborates (0.85) — Yael Arbell, The Circle of Commoning, 70
• Commoning transforms participants’ identities even as it embeds practices of power and difference #expands (0.82) — Jessica Carrick-Hagenbarth, Institutional Bricolage and Commoning…, 15
• Ideologies discover their subjects rather than subjects belonging inevitably to fixed ideologies. #corroborates (0.80) — Hall, Stuart, Essential Essays, Volume 1, 736
• Identity forms only within collectivities rooted in historical circumstances #corroborates (0.78) — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 4119