The Emperor’s New Genes

Ruha Benjamin

The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 2015, vol. 661, issue 1, 130-142

Abstract: This article addresses the politics of genomics through three diagnoses: The first, diagnosing objectivity , discusses how researchers involved in a large-scale population mapping initiative distinguish genomics as relatively objective, compared to other forms of knowledge production. The second case, diagnosing nationality , examines an attempt by the UK Border Agency to use genetic ancestry testing to vet asylum claims. The third case, diagnosing indigeneity , considers how indigenous councils in southern Africa engage genomic science in their struggle for state recognition and rights. I argue that genomics’ allure of objectivity lends itself to such diagnostic attempts among both powerful and subaltern social actors and suggest that developing “technologies of humility†may provide one safeguard against the increasing uptake of genomics as the authority on human difference.

Keywords: race; genomics; public policy; objectivity (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2015
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0002716215587859 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:anname:v:661:y:2015:i:1:p:130-142

DOI: 10.1177/0002716215587859

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().