The theory of encryption of power (TEP) The theory of encryption of power is a cluster theory, mainly drawn up as a political philosophy that challenges the conventional understanding of power, beingness, and democracy proposing a novel way to relate those terms that, according to the proponents of the theory, will render a completely new ontological map of politics, law, and philosophy. According to TEP, power is not something that can be possessed or transferred, but something that is constantly created and transformed by human agency. However, this creative power has been systematically hidden, solidified and/or simulated by institutional structures that impose fixed and static models of identity, such as the state, the law, or the constitution. These structures, that define the backbone of power as domination, are called simulacra, and they act as forms of encryption that prevent or condition the expression of genuine political agency and crush democracy in its own name. One of the main tenets of the theory is that there is a unique shift in the forms of sovereignty and instituted power inaugurated by the imposition of constitutional law as the pinnacle of political societies in the last three centuries. Accordingly, the theory holds that this shift stands as the most sophisticated stage in the permanent thrive of western forms of power to neutralize and finally disarm democracy and political agency. As TEP sustains, coloniality exists because it encrypts power; hence the theory develops insights alongside and in parallel to decolonial theory and critical and subaltern studies. The central claim exposes how, with the synthesis of sovereignty and constitutional law and, in “the name of the people”, the people are made vulnerable to dispossession and exclusion, and how in the name of democracy, democracy is undermined and potentially destroyed.
TEP has been developed mainly by the Colombian legal and political philosopher Ricardo Sanín-Restrepo, but also by Marinella Machado-Araujo, James Martel, Gabriel Mendez, Sabelo J. Ndlovu-Gatsheni and Angus McDonald, among other scholars. Several panels regarding the concept of encryption have been held at the Critical Legal Conference in 2014 at the University of Sussex, in 2015 at the University of Wrocław, Poland, in 2017 at the University of Warwick and in 2021 at the University of Dundee. Lexington Books has recently launched a series of books devoted to the theory.
To further understand the implications of the theory as a cluster of political and theoretical possibilities it is paramount to begin with one of its basic constructions, according to Ricardo Sanin-Restrepo and Marinella Machado -Araujo what the encryption of power "inhibits is the possibility of communicating meanings that are not defined in advance by a transcendent model, where the political lexicon is hierarchized, and the possibility of its uses are reserved for a few. Where there is encryption of lexicons there is thus a hierarchical split of beings and objects in the world" (Sanin-Restrepo and Machado-Araujo, 2020). Hence, TEP understands that there is only a world where difference exists as the fundamental and sole order, but also that such a possibility is heavily obstructed by the concentration of power in forms of transcendent models that fashion oppression. It proposes a radical democracy that challenges the existing structures of power and law, and seeks to emancipate the hidden potentialities of difference.
The theory of encryption of power uses the concept of encryption to describe the process of hiding or protecting information from unauthorized access. In this case, the information that is encrypted is the political agency and creativity of the people, which is reduced to static and solid models of identity that pose as the only form of power. The forms of encryption are the simulacra, which are false representations or imitations of reality that conceal the absence or distortion of the original. For example, sovereignty is a simulacrum that encrypts the power of the people and imposes a transcendent and final authority over them.
TEP is a political and philosophical theory that analyzes and challenges the nature, origin, and effects of power and its encryption. It argues that power is not simply a relation of domination and resistance, but also a process of simulation and concealment that creates illusions of difference and democracy. The theory also claims that power encrypts itself by producing simulacra, which are false representations of reality that hide the true nature and source of power. Thus, the theory suggests that political agency can only be exercised by decrypting power, which means exposing and dismantling the simulacra and revealing the hidden structures and forces that shape reality. The theory draws on and integrates various sources and traditions of political and philosophical thought, such as Aristotle, Spinoza, Deleuze, Foucault, Derrida, and others. The theory of encryption of power is also relevant and applicable to different domains and contexts of power, such as law, economy, culture, or ecology; as it also inspires and informs different practices and movements of decrypting power, such as activism, art, education, or technology.
In understanding the theory it is paramount to grasp the relations between transcendent models, beingness, and the body politic. As Sanin-Restrepo puts it "Since Plato, politics is predefined through extenuating conditions of belonging to the body politic, where “to be” corresponds to an already existing qualification of life, the ‘idea’ as an inner split within forms of identity where some are welcomed into politics and some are excluded according to qualifications that are detached to beingness but to which beingness must conform to be. Hence the relationship between power and life is severed, qualified and utterly standardized to favour particular models of identity. The hidden origin is the malleable metaphysical center of Western discourse."
Transcendent models are fixed, final, solid and static structures that simulate power and prohibit or condition being while collapsing political agency into constituted power. Transcendent models are related to coloniality, sovereignty, simulation and mimesis. The implications and consequences of TEP and transcendent models for democracy, resistance and social change are profound and complex. On the one hand, TEP and transcendent models pose a serious threat to the possibility of genuine democracy, as they conceal and constrain the diversity and creativity of political agency and expression. On the other hand, TEP and transcendent models also open up spaces and opportunities for resistance and social change, as they reveal the cracks and contradictions of the dominant forms of power and identity. Some of the possible strategies and alternatives to decrypt power and create new forms of difference and political agency are: - Challenging the legitimacy and authority of transcendent models by exposing their historical and contingent nature, as well as their negative effects on human rights, social justice and ecological balance.
Main concepts
The theory of encryption of power uses several key concepts to explain and critique power and its encryption. Some of the main concepts are:
- The hidden people. The fundamental political and juridical totality of the of modernity is both a subject and an agency, “the people”. However, that said totality is divided in its intrinsic mechanism. "In modernity the key to encryption is the conversion of the concept of the people into a synecdoche. Accordingly, a false totality (the people of human rights and constitutions, the included) become to symbolize and falsely represent an impossible infinity (the excluded, the hidden people)" (Sanín-Restrepo and Araujo 2020). Accordingly, "the people as a totality is a pars pro toto synecdoche. An absolutely arbitrarily part (white people within a nation state) defines an unattainable infinity (the marginalized people, the forced migrant). The people as a synecdoche joins a part that is an excrement of the (simulated) totality and what the totality lacks in order to become a true totality. As the unrepresentable excess of liberal democracies, the hidden people escape all forms of representation and symbolize what exists beyond the representable" (Sanín-Restrepo 2016, 19; 40). However, the hidden people have to be falsely included to give consistency to the fantasy of the totality. The crucial point is that the people as a whole can only exist and exercise power, if and only if, it keeps that other zone of the people “hidden”. (Sanín-Restrepo 2016, 44). The constitutive ambivalence is as follows: We stand before the constitutive paradox of the legitimacy of liberal constitutionalism. On the one hand, we discover the rigid zone of codified law, of codified reality, that manifests itself in archetypal concepts such as the totality of the people as constituent power (We the People), or the totality of the human rights model (everyone) that announces an abrasive universality that holds together the fruit of reality. On the other hand, we have the excess that is compulsory in order to make such totality work as such, the all but one, the all minus one, as the exact mathematical formula of liberalism, the totality minus what it needs to exclude to keep itself immaculate. (Sanín-Restrepo 2016, 35). According to the theory, the hidden people are those who are excluded, marginalized or oppressed by the simulations that encrypt power, such as democracy, law, sovereignty, identity, representation, human rights and capitalism. The hidden people are those who do not have access to or influence over the institutions and agents that claim to administer justice and order in society. The hidden people are those who suffer the negative consequences of the encryption of power, such as violence, poverty, inequality and injustice However, the hidden people are not only passive victims of the encryption of power. They are also potential agents of resistance and transformation, as they are those who have the capacity to decrypt power, by exposing and challenging the simulations that conceal it. Consequently, the hidden people are those who have the solidarity to collaborate with others who share their vision and values, and to build networks and communities that foster empowerment and change. Therefore, the place of the hidden people within the theory of encryption of power is both a problem and a possibility. It is a problem because it reflects the injustice and oppression that the encryption of power produces. It is a possibility because it offers a source of hope and inspiration for decrypting power.
- Sovereignty.A s Sanin-Restrepo and Machado Araujo explain "Independently of geopolitical shifts, sovereignty continues to define the shape of the world from the definition of the exceptional. Power in coloniality depends on one thing alone, the creation of a hidden people as the exception, a feat that can only be achieved through the exercise of sovereignty (...). The supreme decision on the exception remains the core of the power machine as domination. There is a defining transformation in the modern concept of sovereignty that ties together the theory of encryption and the hidden people. This constitutive alteration requires us to create a new concept to explain and delimit the portentous and elusive realities that it creates, this concept is the “simulacrum” (Sanín-Restrepo 2016, 200). The galvanization between coloniality and liberalism creates the most sophisticated and impermeable machine of power in history. We can formulate it simply: “the people must be both the exception and the (simulated) sovereign!”. Coloniality achieves the most extraordinary exploit: it establishes the people as sovereign as it immediately seizes their sovereignty as absolute power (constituent power). All of this is done while maintaining the simulacrum of popular sovereignty as the political and legal axiom of the people. Therefore, it paradoxically merges the hidden people as sovereign and exception"
- Beingness: The capacity or possibility of existing or acting in a certain way. Beingness is the source and expression of difference and political agency. Beingness is often encrypted or conditioned by the simulacra of power, which limit the possibilities of action and expression for most beings.
- Potentiality and actuality One of the key concepts that the TEP employs to decrypt the hidden mechanisms of power is the Aristotelian concept of entelecheia, which means being-at-an-end or completeness. Sanin Restrepo argues that entelecheia is the main principle that organizes the modern constitutional order, by imposing a predetermined end or purpose to the political community, which is usually identified with the common good, the general will, or the public interest. This end is presented as natural, universal, and rational, and therefore as superior to any other possible end that might be proposed by different groups or individuals within the society. Entelecheia thus functions as a normative criterion that legitimizes the exercise of power by those who claim to represent or embody it, and excludes or subordinates those who do not conform to it or challenge it. However, entelecheia is not the only concept that Aristotle used to describe a kind of action or actuality. He also used the concept of energeia, which means being-at-work or activity. Energeia refers to the dynamic and creative process of actualizing one’s potentialities, without being predetermined by a fixed end or purpose. Energeia is thus more open-ended, pluralistic, and contingent than entelecheia, and allows for more diversity and experimentation in the realization of one’s capacities.
Sanin-Restrepo claims that energeia is a more democratic concept than entelecheia, because it does not impose a single end or purpose to the political community, but rather allows for multiple and conflicting ends or purposes to coexist and interact in a dialogical and agonistic way. Energeia also recognizes the importance of difference and alterity as sources of creativity and innovation, rather than as threats or obstacles to be eliminated or assimilated. Energeia thus enables a more participatory and inclusive form of politics, where power is not monopolized or hidden by a privileged group or institution, but rather shared and distributed among diverse actors and agents. According to Sanin-Restrepo, one of the main tasks of critical constitutional theory is to revert the dominance of entelecheia over energeia in the modern constitutional order, and to promote a more democratic balance between them. This would entail challenging the naturalization and universalization of the dominant end or purpose that organizes the political community, and exposing its historical and contingent character. It would also entail fostering a more pluralistic and dynamic conception of politics, where different ends or purposes can be proposed, debated, negotiated, and revised in an ongoing process of collective deliberation and action. Finally, it would entail empowering the marginalized and oppressed groups and individuals who have been excluded or subordinated by the dominant end or purpose, and enabling them to express their own ends or purposes, as well as their own ways of actualizing them. In conclusion, Sanin Restrepo’s theory of encryption of power offers a novel and critical perspective on how power operates in the global context, by using the Aristotelian concepts of entelecheia and energeia as analytical tools. TEP reveals how entelecheia functions as a principle that encrypts power by imposing a predetermined end or purpose to the political community, which legitimizes the exclusion or subordination of difference. The TEP also suggests how energeia can function as a principle that decrypts power by allowing for multiple and conflicting ends or purposes to coexist and interact in a democratic way, which recognizes and values difference. TEP thus proposes a radical democratic alternative to the dominant forms of constitutionalism, which are based on liberal and republican principles that conceal the coloniality of power.
- Difference: The production or manifestation of diversity or multiplicity in beingness. Difference is the condition and possibility of political agency. Difference is often encrypted or reduced to static and solid models of identity that pose as the only form of power.
- Political agency: The exercise or fulfillment of beingness in producing difference. Political agency is the mode and effect of decrypting power. Political agency is often encrypted or neutralized by the simulacra of power, which simulate difference and democracy.
- Power: The capacity or possibility of beingness to produce difference and political agency. Power can be understood as potentia (potentiality) or actuality (energeia or entelecheia). Power as potentia is the capacity or possibility of beingness to produce difference and political agency.
- Encryption: The process or mechanism by which power conceals or simulates itself by producing simulacra. Encryption is a way of denying or limiting beingness, difference, and political agency. Encryption is also a way of imposing institutional simulations of difference that condition, neutralize or prohibit political agency, reducing difference to static and solid models of identity that pose as the only form of power.
- Simulacrum: A false representation or imitation of reality that hides or distorts the true nature or source of power. Simulacra are the products or effects of encryption.
