Hakki Tan
In an era defined by accelerated economic globalization, ubiquitous digital infrastructures, and a marked erosion of statehood, the traditional categories of individual autonomy, agency, and political subjectivity warrant a radical reassessment. Individuals in the neoliberal present are no longer adequately understood as mere citizens or passive consumers, but rather as victims who are continuously formatted, mined, and extracted by pervasive, often invisible, systemic forces.
The Homovictimus framework is deeply rooted in classical critical theory, drawing crucial insights from a triumvirate of influential thinkers:
Karl Marx’s analysis of economic domination and surplus extraction: Homovictimus extends his logic to encompass the extraction of data, attention, and affective labor as new forms of surplus value in the digital economy.
Antonio Gramsci’s theory of cultural hegemony and passive consent: Homovictimus suggests that in the digital age, popular consent is increasingly algorithmically mediated, often unconscious, and deeply embedded within the very platforms of daily life, leading to a form of “digital hegemony.”
Michel Foucault’s insights into biopolitics and diffuse power mechanisms: his concept of biopolitics, the governance of life itself at the population level, finds a new home in the digital age, where algorithms and data analytics enable pervasive control over biological and psychological processes, far beyond traditional institutions.
However, a crucial distinction of the Homovictimus framework lies in its departure from a sole focus on classical forms of overt ideological indoctrination, or disciplinary institutions. Instead, Homovictimus centers on the hyper-connected, and algorithmically-governed world, where exploitation extends into the most intimate realms.
Therefore, Homovictimus is defined as a “sustainable energy source” for global systems. This definition signifies that individuals are no longer external to these complex global systems; they are intrinsically embedded within them as continuous, often voluntary, sources of data, attention, emotional labor, and performance. All these inputs are indispensable for the efficient functioning of digital economies, transnational governance structures, and the expansion of capital.
This transcends mere economic exploitation. It is deeply cognitive, emotional, and existential. Individuals are subjected to a novel form of digital sacrifice, wherein their inner life – thoughts, feelings, desires, and even potential future actions – is continuously mined, monitored, modulated, and ultimately commodified under the deceptive guise of interactivity, connectivity, convenience, and individual choice. This continuous extraction fuels what Shoshana Zuboff terms “surveillance capitalism,” an economic order that unilaterally claims human experience as free raw material for hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction, and sales.
A central and critical premise of the Homovictimus theory is the diminishing regulatory and protective function of the modern state. The state’s capacity to buffer global flows of capital, information, and influence is increasingly attenuated. This erosion of national institutions, often exacerbated by neoliberal policies that prioritize market liberalization and deregulation, leaves individuals exposed to the relentless logics of global capital and all-pervasive surveillance.
While states remain significant actors, their functions and territories are being reconfigured within a globalized landscape, often serving as facilitators for economic processes rather than as protectors of national populations. This institutional vacuum directly facilitates the rise of Homovictimus making the individual’s inherent vulnerability a structural rather than incidental feature of contemporary life.
Homovictimus is conspicuously evident:
Digital platforms thrive by capturing and monetizing user attention, leading to an economy where human affect and cognitive engagement are transformed into valuable commodities reducing individual autonomy to a mere function of algorithmic optimization.
The neoliberal imperative for constant self-optimization and competitive performance, amplified by digital metrics and always-on connectivity, internalizes external demands. This leads to a “burnout society” and “psychopolitics,” where individuals become their own exploiters, driving themselves to exhaustion.
Traditional community structures and robust public spheres, exacerbated by individualized responsibility preached by neoliberalism, contributes to social fragmentation. The precariousness and fluidity of social bonds in “liquid modernity,” leaves individuals increasingly isolated and solely accountable for their own precarity.
The growing influence of unelected tech giants, algorithmic manipulation of public discourse, and the unconstrained power of global financial capital undermine traditional democratic processes.
The Homovictimus theory transcends existing victimhood theories rooted predominantly in individual identity, trauma, or the direct violation of sovereign rights. Instead, it fundamentally reconfigures the understanding of victimhood, proposing that it is not an exceptional or unfortunate occurrence, but rather a foundational structural condition under advanced neoliberal capitalism. This redefinition of forms of resistance in an era where systemic domination operates primarily through the subtle, pervasive mechanisms of datafication, algorithmic governance, and affective extraction, rather than overt coercion or disciplinary confinement.
Homovictimus is not merely a critique of a particular state of victimhood; it serves as a crucial diagnostic tool for understanding the contemporary human condition. By rigorously recognizing the individual as an increasingly sacrificial node within complex digital and economic systems, the theory issues a powerful call for renewed forms of collective solidarity, imaginative institutional redesign, and profound epistemological resistance. Without such concerted and multi-faceted responses, the normalized and often invisible production of structural victimhood will continue to define the essence of human existence in the 21st century.
