Mülkiyetin Bir Biçimi Olarak Beden ve Biyosa Genişleyen Mülkiyet

Öz

Bu çalışmada en genel anlamıyla, sermaye ve biyolojinin birbirine entegre olmasıyla birlikte ortaya çıkan biyo-sermayenin, mülkiyetin ve sermayenin sınırlarını fiziki dünyadan biyolojik dünyaya doğru genişletmesi ele alınmaktadır. Bu genişlemeyle birlikte bir yandan, mülkiyetin tanımı ve kapsam alanı değişirken, bir yandan da mülkiyetin bu yeni formlarının yasallaşabilmesi için kölelik hukuku ve kapitalizmin klasik dönemlerinden kalma içtihatlar yeniden güncellenmektedir. Dolasıyla bu çalışma bir yandan biyo-sermayenin ortaya çıkışını diğer yandan da, bu sermayeye alan açan kolonici uygulamaların, şirket tüzel kişiliğinin ve kölecilik hukukunun nasıl birbirinin içine geçtiğini anlamaya çalışmaktadır. Bu problematiğin açıklığa kavuşturulması için, kapitalizmin klasik dönemine ait mülkiyet hukuku ile biyo-sermayenin geliştirmiş olduğu mülkiyet hukuku, literatür taramasına dayalı metinsel bir karşılaştırmayla ele alınmıştır. Bu taramanın sonunda, makalede de görülebileceği üzere, köleliğin kaldırılmasının ardından sermayenin antropomorfikleşmesi, biyo-sermaye alanında özel bir boyuta taşınmakla kalmamış aynı zamanda biyoloji bazlı patentler, mülkiyet, sahiplik ve fikri mülkiyet hakları söz konusu olduğunda, çağdaş hukukun 19. Yüzyılın sonlarında lağvedilmiş olan kölelik hukukuna bağlı içtihatlar yaptığı görülmüştür.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Beden
• Biyos
• Biyo-Sermaye
• Mülkiyet
• Kölelik

The Body as a Form of Property and Property Expanding into the Body

Öz

In the most general sense, this study deals with the expansion of the boundaries of property and capital from the physical world to the biological world by bio-capital, which emerged with the integration of capital and biology. With this expansion, on the one hand, the definition and scope of property changed, and on the other hand, slavery law and jurisprudence from the classical periods of capitalism were updated in order to legalise these new forms of property. Therefore, this study seeks to understand the emergence of bio-capital on the one hand, and on the other, how colonialist practices, corporate legal personality, and slavery law intertwine to create space for this capital. In order to clarify this problem, the property law of the classical period of capitalism and the property law developed by bio-capital are discussed through a textual comparison based on a literature review. At the end of this review, as can be seen in the article, the anthropomorphism of capital following the abolition of slavery has not only been carried to a special dimension in the field of bio-capital but also in the case of biology-based patents, ownership, possession, and intellectual property rights. Thus, it has been observed that contemporary law has jurisprudence based on slavery law, which was abolished in the late 19th century.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• body
• bios
• biyo-capital
• property
• slavery

Kaynakça

1. Babeuf, G. (1796). Manifesto of the Equals. https://www.marxists.org/history/france/revolution/conspiracy-equals/1796/manifesto.htm
2. Barakat, M. (2024) Virginia Judge to Decide Whether State Law Consider Embryos as Property. https://apnews.com/article/frozen-embryos-virginia-court-case-ivf-f33d8d57ad4f3073c6f306007d781df0
3. Bensaid, D. (2017). Mülksüzler: Marx, Odun Hırsızları ve Yoksulların Hukuku. Dipnot Yayınları: Ankara.
4. Berger, B. (2006). It’s not about the fox: The untold history of Pierson v. Post, 55, Duke Law Journal, 1089-1143
5. Best, S. M. (2004). The fugitive’s properties: law and the poetics of possession. University of Chicago Press: Chicago
6. Biehl, J. (2005) Vita, Life in a Zone of Social Abandonment University of California Press: California
7. Bossuet, J. B., & Riley, P. (1990). Politics drawn from the very words of Holy Scripture (1st paperback ed). Cambridge University Press.
8. Boström, D., Hughes-Schepher, N. (2012). The body of the enemy. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/57b1ba7746c3c4e559a7a8c5/t/5a33a73753450a16519856f1/1513334584865/Body+of+the+Enemy-NS-H%26Bostrom.pdf

9. Bracton, H. d., Thorne, S. E., & Selden Society. (1968). Bracton on the laws and customs of England = Bracton de legibus et consuetudinibus Angliae. Belknap Press: Cambridge
10. Buenos Aires Herald (2023) Milei calls for “market mechanisms” to solve lack of organ donors https://buenosairesherald.com/politics/milei-calls-for-market-mechanisms-to-solve-lack-of-organ-donors
11. Cabral, S. (2023) Colorado ex-funeral directors jailed for selling body parts
12. Cahill, K. (2001). Who Owns Britain. Canongate: Edinburgh
13. Challaye, F. (1969). Mülkiyetin Tarihi. Remzi Yayınevi: İstanbul
14. Cheney, A. (2006). Body brokers: inside America’s underground trade in human remains. Broadway Books: New York
15. Fairfax County House (2023) Honeyline Vs. Jason
16. Foucault, M. (2003). Cinselliğin Tarihi. Ayrıntı yayınları: İstanbul.
17. Hardin G. (1968). The Tragedy of the Commons. Science, 13, 1243-1248.
18. Hauser, C. (2023) Judge Cites 1849 Slavery Law in Ruling Embryos Can be Considered Property. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/16/us/virginia-slave-laws-embryos.html
19. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64159612
20. https://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/circuit/sites/circuit/files/assets/documents/pdf/opinions/cl-2021-15372-honeyhline-heidemann-v-jason-heidemann.pdf
21. Kilgour, D., Gutmann, E., Matas, D. (2016) Bloody Harvest/The Slaughter. https://endtransplantabuse.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/Bloody_Harvest- The_Slaughter-2016-Update-V3-and-Addendum-20170430.pdf
22. Lock, M. (2002). Twice Death: Organ Transplant and Reinvention of Death. University of California Press: London.
23. Lock, M., Crowley-Makota, M. (2008). Situating The Practice of Organ Donation in Familial, Cultural, and Political Context. Transplantation Reviews, 22, 154–157
24. Luck, C. (2014). The Body of Property: Antebellum American Fiction and the Phenomenology of Possession. Fordham University Press: New York https://doi.org/10.1515/9780823263028
25. Marks, K. (1976). Ekonomi Politiğin Eleştirisine Katkı. Sol Yayınları: Ankara
26. Marx, K. (2011) Kapital: Ekonomi Politiğin Eleştirisi¸1. Cilt. Yordam yayınları: İstanbul
27. McNally, D. (2011). Monsters of the market: zombies, vampires and global capitalism. Haymarket Books: Chicago
28. Montesquieu, C. d. S. (1989). The spirit of the laws (A. M. Cohler, B. C. Miller, & H. S. Stone, Eds.). Cambridge University Press: Camridge
29. Mutlu, B. (2023) Duygulanımsal biyoekonomiler ve yumurta donörlerinin (görünmeyen) üreme emeği. Temasın İmkânları Değmek, Değer Üretmek, Dayanışmak içinde, ed. A. Akalın. Metis Yayınları: İstanbul
30. Nancy, Scheper-Hughes. (2003). Rotten trade: Millennial capitalism, human values and global justice in organs trafficking. Journal of Human Rights, 2(2), 197-226. doi: 10.1080/1475483032000078189
31. Parekh, B. C. (2013). Jeremy Bentham: Ten Critical Essays. Taylor and Francis: London&Newyork http://public.ebookcentral.proquest.com/choice/publicfullrecord.aspx?p=1111622
32. Patriquin, L. (2007). Speenhamland, Settlement and the New Poor Law. In: Agrarian Capitalism and Poor Relief in England, 1500–1860. Palgrave Macmillan: London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230591387_5
33. Polanyi, K. (1944). The great transformation. Farrar & Rinehart, Inc: London
34. Pomeranz, K. (2000). The great divergence: China, Europe, and the making of the modern world economy. Princeton University Press: Princeton.
35. Pufendorf, S. (2023). Doğal Hukuka Göre İnsanın ve Yurttaşın Ödevi. Timaş Yayınları: İstanbul
36. Ragone, H. (1994). Surrogate Motherhood: Conception In the Heart. Routledge: London https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429307997
37. Robespierre, M. (1792). On Subsistence Goods. https://www.marxists.org/history/france/revolution/robespierre/1792/subsistence-goods.htm
38. Rousseau, J.-J., & Wootton, D. (2019). On the social contract (D. A. Cress, Trans.; Second edition). Hackett Publishing Company, Inc: Indianapolis
39. Rozental, A. A. (1956). The Enclosure Movement in France. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 16(1), 55–71. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3484794
40. Schmitt, C. (2007). The concept of the political: Expanded edition. University of Chicago Press: Chicago
41. Sharp L. A. (2001). Commodified kin: death, mourning, and competing claims on the bodies of organ donors in the United States. American anthropologist, 103(1), 112–133. https://doi.org/10.1525/aa.2001.103.1.112
42. Sharp, L. (1995) Organ transplantation as a transformative experience: Anthropological Insights into the Restructuring of the Self. Medical Anthropology Quarterly, 9, 357-389
43. Shiva, V. (2000). Stolen Harvest: The Hijacking of the Global Food Supply. South End Press: Cambridge
44. Thompson, E. P. (1993). Customs in Common. Penguin: London
45. Thompson, E. P. (2016). Making of the English Working Class. Open Road Media: London