A partir da segunda metade do século XX, as políticas econômicas disseminaram um conjunto de dispositivos sutis, no sentido de seu exercício, ao mesmo tempo em que mais plurais, em relação à sua extensão. Um dos principais deslocamentos epistemológicos produzidos pelo discurso neoliberal diz respeito à inserção da subjetividade humana como elemento central da racionalidade econômica. A inclusão da subjetividade na lógica dos cálculos econômicos possibilitou construir a figura do homo oeconomicus como referente antropológico do novo discurso neoliberal. Um (...) dos principais autores nessa jornada é Ludwig von Mises. A teoria misiana é profundamente filosófica: dela é possível coletar toda a estrutura da teoria neoliberal e de seu contraste bifocal entre a ação econômica do mercado e a teoria política do Estado, e nela o homo oeconomicus ocupa um lugar central. A genealogia de Michel Foucault sobre o escopo da governamentalidade neoliberal trouxe um olhar crítico diferente sobre os princípios constitutivos deste discurso. A par da teoria de Mises, a leitura de Foucault nos é precisa, na medida em que nos permite contrastar a razão de governo, constituída ao longo dos modelos de pensamento, com aquela ótica empresarial do homo oeconomicus como um suposto sujeito soberano. O intuito deste ensaio é provocar um cruzamento crítico entre o pensamento de Mises e de Foucault, concentrado principalmente no estudo das contradições que surgem no seio do discurso neoliberal da figura do homo oeconomicus como sujeito soberano, com as práticas de governamentalização desse mesmo homo oeconomicus. O ensaio é constituído de três momentos: primeiramente, nosso objetivo é compreender a teoria do mercado de von Mises, com o intuito de alinhavar alguns conceitos importantes, em especial o conceito de soberania do homo oeconomicus; em seguida, temos como pretensão analisar a teoria de Foucault sobre a governamentalidade neoliberal, acenando em direção ao modo pelo qual a teoria de Mises projeta-se como uma razão econômica de governo; em um terceiro ponto, desenvolvemos algumas implicações derivadas dos cruzamentos das teses sobre a soberania do homo oeconomicus, de Mises, com as análises sobre a governamentalidade desse homo oeconomicus desenvolvidas pelos estudos de Foucault. (shrink)

This paper begins with the lived accounts of emergency and critical care medical interventions in which an unhoused person is brought to the emergency department in cardiac arrest. The case is a dramatised representation of the extent to which biopolitical forces via reduction to bare life through biopolitical and necropolitical operations are prominent influences in nursing and medical care. This paper draws on the scholarship of Michel Foucault, Giorgio Agamben, and Achille Mbembe to offer a theoretical analysis of the power (...) dynamics that influence the health care and death care of patients who are caught in the auspices of a neoliberal capitalist healthcare apparatus. This paper offers analysis of the overt displays of biopower over those individuals cast aside as generally unworthy of access to healthcare in a postcolonial capitalist system, in addition to the ways in which humans are reduced to ‘bare life’ in their dying days. We analyse this case study through Agamben's description of thanatopolitics, a ‘regime of death’, and the technologies that accompany the dying process, particularly in that of the homo sacer. Additionally, this paper illustrates the ways in which necropolitics and biopower are integral to understanding how the most advanced and expensive medical interventions make visible the political values of the healthcare system and how nurses and healthcare functions in these deathworlds. The purpose of this paper is to develop a greater understanding of biopolitical and necropolitical operations in acute and critical care environments, and to offer guidance to nurses in these spaces as they work to uphold ethical duties in a system that increasingly dehumanises. (shrink)

This article intends to analyze the implications of a hypothesis that extends Foucault's analysis of neoliberalism from its effects on modern democracy. For this purpose, Wendy Brown's recent work examines how neoliberal rationality affects democracy, transforms its imaginary and even its main subject, namely the demos. Brown points to two problems of the "neoliberalism's stealth revolution," namely that the neoliberal rationality transforms and undoes democracy by directly affecting its fundamental principle of popular sovereignty. Such transformation is made from the change (...) produced in the democratic imaginary and, mainly, from the transformation of the economic subject from a subject of interest to human capital, as well as the political subject, relegated to the background. From this first problem, we examine how they happen and what are the consequences of changing the democratic imaginary and its central political subject. The second problem pointed out by Brown deals with the interference of neoliberal reason in sovereign autonomy. The second part of this article seeks, therefore, to analyze the relationship between the sovereignty of the nation-state and the notion of popular sovereignty from the problem of the expansion of capital and the vulnerability of the frontiers and territory where citizenship is exercised. (shrink)

In his lectures on neoliberalism, Michel Foucault argues that neoliberalism produces subjects as ‘entrepreneurs of themselves’. He bases this claim on Gary Becker’s conception of the utility-maximizing agent who solely acts upon cost/benefit-calculations. Not all neoliberalized subjects, however, are encouraged to maximize their utility through mere calculation. This article argues that Foucault’s description of neoliberal subjectivity obscures a non-calculative, more audacious side to neoliberal subjectivity. Precarious workers in the creative industries, for example, are encouraged not merely to rationally manage their (...) human capital, but also to take a leap of faith to acquire unpredictable successes. It is this latter risk-loving, extra-calculative side to neoliberal subjectivity that economists usually designate as ‘entrepreneurial’. By confronting Foucault with the theories of entrepreneurship of the Austrian School of Economics, Frank Knight, and Joseph Schumpeter, the Foucauldian analytical framework is enriched. Neoliberal subjectivation is not the monolithic promotion of utility-maximizing agents, but the generation of a multiplicity of modes for entrepreneurs to relate to oneself and the market. (shrink)

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo principal a compreensão e análise da noção de “sociedade civil” abordada pelo filósofo francês Michel Foucault no curso Nascimento da biopolítica: Curso no Collége de France (1978-1979), onde Foucault se propõe à análise dos princípios teóricos do liberalismo. Dando ênfase especificamente às suas últimas aulas do curso Nascimento da biopolítica, que traz a análise da ideia de “Homo oeconomicus”, como “sujeito de interesse” distinto do “sujeito de direito”, e da noção de sociedade civil, (...) correlativa da tecnologia liberal de governo. Como ideias contrapostas no pensamento liberal clássico, a sociedade civil aparecerá em oposição ao Estado, como a natureza ao artifício, ou o espontâneo ao forçado. (shrink)

In 1974, the Liberal government of Pierre Trudeau released a “green paper” known as the Lalonde Report, after the health minister at that time. The report formulated perspectives on health and the main concepts and ideas developed in it, particularly the concept of “lifestyle,” which became the foundation of public health policies in many different European countries and the United States. The concept of “lifestyle” connected personal behaviour and habits to the individual health condition; people were not dying due to (...) a lack of access to medical care but because they lived a life prone to personal risk taking. Furthermore, what is seldom discussed is that this report not only propagated the (neo)liberal view of citizens as autonomous rational actors (homo oeconomicus), with personal responsibility for their health, but it was a first step in the transformation of Medicare and went far beyond the question of health promotion. Health was no longer something that happened to a person but was created through personal choice and, therefore, one had to assume responsibility for one's behaviour. Using Foucault's definition of government as the “conduct of conduct,” we will demonstrate that the Lalonde report must be understood as a specific “technology of government” and contributed to a neoliberal transformation of health care despite the fact that the Canadian system of Medicare was based on the idea of universality, meaning citizens had equal access to health care independent of their socio‐economic situation. As we will demonstrate, the Lalonde report undermined this foundation and initiated a profound reorientation, not only of the healthcare system, but even more importantly, it radically changed the way we think about our behaviour around health‐related issues. We will also discuss how the making of the report contributed to the redefinition of politics and demonstrated a lack of concern with liberal‐democratic decision‐making processes. (shrink)

Michel Foucault and Roberto Esposito have been two of the most influential biopolitical thinkers of the twentieth century, but their respective approaches to the relationship between life and politics do not address the main problem of the Anthropocene: the relationship between life and energy. Thus, this article analyzes the biophysical limits of biopolitics in the works of Foucault and Roberto Esposito and, to overcome these limits, it proposes to analyze the physiological assembly of the devices of power within the energetic (...) flows of social metabolisms. The article concludes that the physio-political approach to human societies allows us to overcome the biophysical limits of both Foucauldian biopolitics and Esposito's immunological paradigm. (shrink)

Nietzsche coins the enigmatic term homo natura to capture his understanding of the human being as a creature of nature and tasks philosophy with the renaturalisation of humanity. Following Foucault's critique of the human sciences, Vanessa Lemm discusses the reception of Nietzsche's naturalism in philosophical anthropology, psychoanalysis and gender studies. She offers an original reading of homo natura that brings back the ancient Greek idea of nature and sexuality as creative chaos and of the philosophical life as outspoken (...) and embodied truth, perhaps best exemplified by the Cynics' embrace of social and cultural transformation. (shrink)

The article examines Tania Bruguera’s works 10,148,451 (2019, Tate Modern, UK) and the three versions of Tatlin’s Whisper #6 (2009 and 2014, Havana; 2015, Tate Modern). Thinking with Achille Mbembe’s work on necropolitics, Lauren Berlant’s on “slow death,” and Michel Foucault’s on biopolitics, Paramana suggests that 10,148,451 addresses the collective subject and critiques contemporary necropolitics, while the versions of Tatlin’s Whisper #6 address individuals as political subjects, and comment on the panoptic gaze and contemporary biopolitics. Through her analysis of these (...) works, Paramana shows how Bruguera’s work is created to comment on the specific political economies in which it is presented, how the perception of the work’s politics differs when presented in different political economies, and the insights therefore the work might offer to them. Paramana argues that Bruguera’s work has often achieved more than local and national governments and that her “symbolic work with activist parameters” is surprisingly more efficacious than her activist work. The article concludes with the insights Bruguera’s work offers for the future of bodies in the 21st century. (shrink)

In _Necropolitics_ Achille Mbembe—a leader in the new wave of Francophone critical theory—theorizes the genealogy of the contemporary world—a world plagued by ever-increasing inequality, militarization, enmity, and terror, as well as by a resurgence of racist, fascist, and nationalist forces determined to exclude and kill. He outlines how democracy has begun to embrace its dark side, or what he calls its “nocturnal body,” which is based on the desires, fears, affects, relations, and violence that drove colonialism. This shift has hollowed (...) out democracy, thereby eroding the very values, rights, and freedoms liberal democracy routinely celebrates. As a result, war has become the sacrament of our times, in a conception of sovereignty that operates by annihilating all those considered to be enemies of the state. Despite his dire diagnosis, Mbembe draws on post-Foucault debates on biopolitics, war, and race, as well as Fanon's notion of care as a shared vulnerability, to explore how new conceptions of the human that transcend humanism might come to pass. These new conceptions would allow us to encounter the Other not as a thing to exclude, but as a person with whom to build a more just world. (shrink)

This paper argues that ‘the Anthropocene’ is a deeply depoliticizing notion. This de-politicization unfolds through the creation of a set of narratives, what we refer to as ‘AnthropoScenes’, which broadly share the effect of off-staging certain voices and forms of acting. Our notion of the Anthropo-obScene is our tactic to both attest to and undermine the depoliticizing stories of ‘the Anthropocene’. We first examine how various AnthropoScenes, while internally fractured and heterogeneous, ranging from geo-engineering and earth system science to more-than-human (...) and object-oriented ontologies, place things and beings, human and non-human, within a particular relational straitjacket that does not allow for a remainder or constitutive outside. This risks deepening an immunological biopolitical fantasy that promises adaptive and resilient terraforming, an earth system management of sorts that permits life as we know it to continue for some, while turning into a necropolitics for others. Second, we develop a post-foundational political perspective in relation to our dramatically changing socio-ecological situation. This perspective understands the political in terms of performance and, in an Arendtian manner, re-opens the political as forms of public-acting in common that subtracts from or exceeds what is gestured to hold socio-ecological constellations together. We conclude that what is off-staged and rendered obscene in ‘the AnthropoScenes’ carries precisely the possibility of a return of the political. (shrink)

Michel Foucault is generally considered one of the most brilliant and influential philosophers of the twentieth century, yet much of his writing has remained unpublished and/or unavailable in English. It is only recently that the French publisher Gallimard issued Dis et Ecrits, the first complete collection of everything Foucault published outside of his monographs. Ethics, the first of three volumes in the collection, provides a lucid and accessible overview of Foucault's work. Included in the first section of this volume are (...) his groundbreaking analyses of penal institutions, psychiatry, "biopolitics," and the modern subject. A second section contains interviews, along with Foucault's key writings on ethics. Winner of the Choice Outstanding Academic Book Award. (shrink)

Necropolitics by Achille Mbembe takes us back to his seminal text on “Necropolitics” translated and published in the US in 2003. At this point, 40 years after Foucault’s Biopolitics, Mbembe was re-theorizing biopolitics through a necro horizon, which turned out to be a robust conceptual shift from Western thought. Not much else is explicitly said about necropolitics in the titular book, which comes 17 years after the seminal text that had a significant impact on the theory and practice of philosophy, (...) politics, anthropology, and esthetics. Mbembe presents the layers of forms, modes, and procedures of the necropolitical working through contemporary neoliberal global societies. It is therefore not surprising that Mbembe makes reference to theory in forms, form is the way to redefine or rephrase content, and “who should live and who must die” is currently the beginning. But how this is done in the 21st century, what are the methods and procedures to implement this central act in neoliberal global democracy —that is the task of this book. (shrink)

The work of Giorgio Agamben, one of Italy's most important and original philosophers, has been based on an uncommon erudition in classical traditions of philosophy and rhetoric, the grammarians of late antiquity, Christian theology, and modern philosophy. Recently, Agamben has begun to direct his thinking to the constitution of the social and to some concrete, ethico-political conclusions concerning the state of society today, and the place of the individual within it. In Homo Sacer, Agamben aims to connect the problem (...) of pure possibility, potentiality, and power with the problem of political and social ethics in a context where the latter has lost its previous religious, metaphysical, and cultural grounding. Taking his cue from Foucault's fragmentary analysis of biopolitics, Agamben probes with great breadth, intensity, and acuteness the covert or implicit presence of an idea of biopolitics in the history of traditional political theory. He argues that from the earliest treatises of political theory, notably in Aristotle's notion of man as a political animal, and throughout the history of Western thinking about sovereignty, a notion of sovereignty as power over "life" is implicit. The reason it remains merely implicit has to do, according to Agamben, with the way the sacred, or the idea of sacrality, becomes indissociable from the idea of sovereignty. Drawing upon Carl Schmitt's idea of the sovereign's status as the exception to the rules he safeguards, and on anthropological research that reveals the close interlinking of the sacred and the taboo, Agamben defines the sacred person as one who can be killed and yet not sacrificed—a paradox he sees as operative in the status of the modern individual living in a system that exerts control over the collective "naked life" of all individuals. (shrink)

In the humanities and social sciences, the concept of the Anthropocene has become the starting point for theoretical analyses of the immediate relationship between the environmental preconditions for the existence of civilization and the human actions whose consequences threaten these preconditions. From the philosophical-anthropological point of view, reflections on the concepts of the Anthropocene focus not only on a critical analysis of the claims about human that originate in the natural sciences but also on an understanding of the overall role (...) of humanity in the new geological-climatic regime of the Earth. The primary purpose of this paper is to highlight two-pronged problem areas, which include both the problem of anthropological constants as specific ways of makingstatements about humans and the problem of using them to reflect on the conceptual system of the Anthropocene. In particular, this paper emphasizes hypotheses and claims from the Anthropocene concept of Earth System Science that point to humans becoming a geobiophysical force in the Anthropocene. Three areas in which anthropological constants could be subsequently subjected to a deeper analysis are proposed. -------------------------- Received: 01/12/2022. Reviewed: 08/02/2023. Accepted: 30/03/2023. (shrink)

The Italian philosopher Giorgio Agamben, in his Homo Sacer-cycle, has developed a new paradigm for thinking the Shoah. Departing from Michel Foucault’s biopolitical thought, he argues that modern political power is made possible by the helix-structure of sovereign power and homo sacer. Sovereign power is situated at the threshold of the prevailing juridico-political order and can, in a state of exception, violently suspend or establish the law. In this decision, homo sacer is legally excluded from the law. (...) When the state of exception is made general, the law of sovereignty governs all life and everyone becomes homo sacer. This happened concretely in the Shoah. In the concentration camps, the Muselmann is produced. During the Shoah by Bullet, as happened in Lithuania, the generalised sovereign biopolitics turns into radical thanatopolitics. (shrink)

This volume links three different theoretical approaches that have a common focus on the relationship between biopolitics and bioethics. This collection of papers can be categorized into different domains that are representative of the contemporary usage of biopolitics as a concept. On the one hand, several chapters develop a clear and up-to-date understanding of the primary sources of the concept and related theories of Agamben, Negri or Foucault and approach the question of relevance within the field of bioethics. Another group (...) of papers apply the philosophical concepts and theories of biopolitics (biopower, Homo Sacer, biocitizenship) on very specific currently debated bioethical issues. Some scholars rely on the more mundane understanding of (bio)politics and investigate how its relationship with bioethics could be philosophically conceptualized. Additionally, this work also contains papers that follow a more legally oriented analysis on the effects of contemporary biopolitics on human rights and European law. The authors are philosophers, legal scholars or bioethicists. The major strength of this volume is to provide the reader with major insights and orientation in these different contemporary usages of the concept and theories of biopolitics, within the context of its various ethically relevant applications. (shrink)

This article considers two films, Elysium (Neil Bloomkamp, 2013) and What Happened to Monday (Tommy Wirkola, 2017), in order to demonstrate that they foreshadow a paradigmatic shift in the relationship between biopolitics and thanatopolitics. According to Michel Foucault, and later Giorgio Agamben and Roberto Esposito, it is chiefly the association of humans with biological danger that causes biopolitics to mutate into thanatopolitics. However, in these two films, humans are construed as an ecological danger that prompt thanatopolitics. They depict futures in (...) which the regimes in power act on ecological threats by brutally micromanaging and killing members of their populations. In this the films unveil how the idea of sustainability as equilibrium can never benefit all, but must always leave some human beings out, either by abandoning them to die or by actively killing them. This is important because it brings to light the risk that the Anthropocene could engender regimes that will kill on different grounds than regimes have in the past. (shrink)

En el texto se hace hincapié en los tenebrosos elementos sacrificiales que le ha acarreado al movimiento estudiantil perteneciente a la combativa Escuela Normal Rural de Ayotzinapa, situada en el Estado mexicano de Guerrero, dominado por el narcotráfico y un gobierno municipal que actúa en complicidad con este último. Se trata de un establecimiento que, además de formar maestros populares, se halla enrolado en las luchas sociales y políticas. A fines de 2014 fueron reprimidos brutalmente y objeto de desaparición forzosa (...) unos 43 alumnos de esa Escuela, lo cual dio lugar a una ininterrumpida protesta civil con muy diversos ribetes internos y mundiales cuyas múltiples expresiones procuran explicitarse en el trabajo. Por otra parte, se incursiona en el trasfondo ideológico que viene acompañando el devenir institucional mexicano bajo el manto del neoliberalismo -al cual el autor ha optado por reconceptuar como neuroliberalismo en distintos ensayos suyos y en colaboración. Conjuntamente, se enfoca la problemática en cuestión desde un ángulo doctrinario y existencial específico: el del necropoder y el pensamiento crítico. Entre los referentes bibliográficos principales pueden citarse desde Foucault y Mbembe a Holloway y González Casanova. The paper deals with the engagement of mexican student movement in Ayotzinapa Rural College and the repressive way that the local goverment and the narco-maffia fought against those students, with the disappearance and destruction of their bodies and cadavers, around september 2014. The case has an enormous influence in world and local public opinion, with different movilizations and artistic expressions that have a very critical reading of Mexican treatment in the field of Human Rights. Mexican and international neoliberalism, as well as bio and necropolitics, has been specially analyzed with the auxiliary tool of critical thinking. Between the theoretical authors that are close involved in these approaches, we can find Michel Foucault, Achille Mbembe, John Holloway and Pablo González Casanova. (shrink)

Much has been written about biopolitical sovereignty in the wake of Agamben's work, which relies, at least in the first volume of Homo Sacer, on Carl Schmitt's transcendental account of sovereignty. This article argues, however, that Foucault and Arendt rightly identify what Derrida once called the “changing shape and place of sovereignty” in modernity, which for them is horizontal and disseminated within a presupposed nation. For this reason, we will look to the source of modern philosophical immanentism, Spinoza, to (...) show that he is not extrinsic to this modern biopolitics, and demonstrates how the sovereign exception and its nationalized version work hand-in-glove in the era of which he was a part – and thus is part of all thinking that would take this to form a new communitas. In this way, we argue that it is Spinoza's political theology, not Schmitt's, that is the better pass-key to what Foucault and Arendt identify as biopolitical. By doing so, we put in tension two trends in recent Continental philosophy: philosophical vitalism and the critique of biopolitics at the heart at any contemporary thinking of community. (shrink)

The work of Giorgio Agamben, one of Italy's most important and original philosophers, has been based on an uncommon erudition in classical traditions of philosophy and rhetoric, the grammarians of late antiquity, Christian theology, and modern philosophy. Recently, Agamben has begun to direct his thinking to the constitution of the social and to some concrete, ethico-political conclusions concerning the state of society today, and the place of the individual within it. In _Homo Sacer,_ Agamben aims to connect the problem of (...) pure possibility, potentiality, and power with the problem of political and social ethics in a context where the latter has lost its previous religious, metaphysical, and cultural grounding. Taking his cue from Foucault's fragmentary analysis of biopolitics, Agamben probes with great breadth, intensity, and acuteness the covert or implicit presence of an idea of biopolitics in the history of traditional political theory. He argues that from the earliest treatises of political theory, notably in Aristotle's notion of man as a political animal, and throughout the history of Western thinking about sovereignty, a notion of sovereignty as power over "life" is implicit. The reason it remains merely implicit has to do, according to Agamben, with the way the sacred, or the idea of sacrality, becomes indissociable from the idea of sovereignty. Drawing upon Carl Schmitt's idea of the sovereign's status as the exception to the rules he safeguards, and on anthropological research that reveals the close interlinking of the sacred and the taboo, Agamben defines the sacred person as one who can be killed and yet not sacrificed—a paradox he sees as operative in the status of the modern individual living in a system that exerts control over the collective "naked life" of all individuals. (shrink)

Giorgio Agamben, Homo Sacer. Puterea suverană şi viaţa nudă (Homo Sacer. Sovereign power and the naked life) Ed. Idea Design&Print, Cluj- Napoca, 2006.

Despite appearances, Agamben’s engagement with Foucault in Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life is not an extension of Foucault’s analysis of biopolitics but rather a disciplining of Foucault for failing to take Nazism seriously. This moralizing rebuke is the result of methodological divergences between the two thinkers that, I argue, have fundamental political consequences. Re-reading Foucault’s most explicitly political work of the mid-1970s, I show that Foucault’s commitment to genealogy is aligned with his commitment to “insurrection”—not simply archival (...) or historical, but practical and political insurrection—even as his non-moralizing understanding of critique makes space for the resistances he hopes to proliferate. By contrast, Agamben’s resurrection of sovereignty turns on a moralizing Holocaust exceptionalism that anoints both sovereignty and the state with inevitably totalitarian powers. Thus, while both Agamben and Foucault take positions “against” totalitarianism, their very different understandings of this term and method of investigating it unwittingly render Agamben complicit with the totalitarianism he otherwise seeks to reject. (shrink)

Our abstract begins with the question: what means the sentence - the life is a capital? Michel Foucault makes the question when he signalizes that the bio-power is connected to the capitalism. In this case, the question is to understand how the increase and the confiscate of wealth suppose the power’s development that captures the life strength to make them participe to the wealth creation process. What other fundamental question could be emphasized? The contemporaneous capitalism is strictly connected to method (...) of subjetictivity production. In Nascimento da biopolítica Foucault shows how the capitalism appeals to the people to construct their lives like enterprises. It refers to homo oeconomicus like a suject that considers himself as a valuable capital. We realize the human capital is managed like lives markets, through the neoliberal biogovernamentality, regulating the sujects conducts by a place of truth, the market . We propose the constitution of a new subjectivity: the homo dispensatio. Tracing the relation between the life management as a capital and the constitution of this subjectivity, we could signalize what this situation can provide from the ethical and political viewpoint. (shrink)

This volume, which is rooted in biogeophysical studies, addresses conceptions of political action in the Anthropocene and the tension between a desire to accomplish the Promethean project of modernity and a post-Promethean approach. This work explores the idea of ​​an anthropological mutation of political consolidation from a “post-Promethean togetherness”, to creating the capacity to act together. The political thinking of the human condition developed by Hannah Arendt is important here as a resource for thinking about humanity in terms of human (...) adventure. This has three dimensions: hubris, the world and coexistence referring respectively to the logic of profit of the homo oeconomicus, the logic of responsibility of the homo collectivus and the logic of the hospitality of the homo religatus. The intellectual and political attitude outlined in this book is an extension of critical theory: the work also puts forward a critique of what poses a problem in our relationship to the world and suggests how to overcome it, the ultimate goal being social transformation. The author propose an uprising and an anthropological consolidation of politics based on the revitalization that is brought about by the sharing of a conviviality both between humans and with what is non-human. The identification of conviviality as an educational paradigm to survive the Anthropocene gives us the much needed reason for hope despite this heritage of the Anthropocene. In addition to Arendtian thinking, this critical theory for the Anthropocene draws on the political thinking of several contemporary authors including Maurice Bellet, Hartmut Rosa, Andreas Weber, Dominique Bourg, and Christian Arnsperger. This volume is of interest to researchers in the Anthropocene. (shrink)

This article argues that the indefinite detention and torture of prisoners at the Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp and the intentional destabilization of Palestinian civilian life in the Israeli occupied Palestinian territories are indicative of the emergence of a new postmodern form of power. Coining the term homo dolorosus – the man who is available to be made to suffer – this article seeks to understand this emergent politics of suffering through a historicized reading of Foucault’s typology of power, informed (...) by the work of Giorgio Agamben. It is argued that, just as discipline was the dark inverse of the modern utopian Enlightenment project of universal democratic inclusion, the politics of suffering is the dark inverse of the postmodern biopolitical project of security. Using the work of Mikkel Joronen, Jasbir Puar and Lauren Wilcox as signposts, this article argues that homo dolorosus is produced by power’s encounter with a population that it perceives or represents as simultaneously risky and dependent. Moreover, it is suggested that homo dolorosus may be the manifestation of a project that aims to do away with freely-deciding subjectivity while keeping the human body alive. (shrink)

The article addresses the ongoing debate about the origins of biopolitics. While Foucault’s analysis of biopolitics approached it as a modern rationality of government, Agamben’s Homo Sacer series presented biopolitics as having a longer provenance, dating back to the antiquity. These polar positions are not mutually exclusive but coexist in these and other theories of biopolitics, which approach its object as both modern and ancient, having its chronological origin in the eighteenth to nineteenth centuries yet also possessing a prehistory (...) of precursors. The article interprets this dual origin in terms of Paolo Virno’s theory of historical temporality, which distinguishes between the chronological past of historical events and their potential past, which accompanies and is negated in them. Coexisting with its own unrealized potential, every historical event remains incomplete and extends itself both backwards and forwards, positing its precursors and prefiguring its future outcomes. While modern in the chronological sense, biopolitics is retrospectively inscribed in a longer historical lineage, its antecedents easily identifiable in the history of political thought. Finally, we apply this approach to Virno’s own account of the history of biopolitics, questioning his identification of past potential with labour-power. (shrink)

The fourth and final volume of The History of Sexuality offers the keystone to Michel Foucault’s critique of Western neoliberal societies. Confessions of the Flesh provides the heretofore missing link that ties Foucault’s late writings on subjectivity to his earlier critique of power. Foucault identifies in Augustine’s treatment of marital sexual relations the moment of birth of the modern legal actor and of the legalization of social relations. With the appearance of the modern legal subject, Foucault’s critique of modern Western (...) societies is complete: it is now possible to see how the later emergence of an all-knowing homo œconomicus strips the State of knowledge and thus deals a fatal blow to its legitimacy. The appearance of both the modern legal actor and homo œconomicus makes it possible to fold the entire four-volume History of Sexuality back into Foucault’s earlier critique of punitive and biopolitical power. And it now challenges us to interrogate how we, contemporary subjects, are shaped in such a way as to implicate ourselves—both willingly and unwittingly—in the social order within which we find ourselves and that, through the interaction of knowledge-power-subjectivity, we reproduce. (shrink)

Michel Foucault articulated the hypothesis of biopower and biopolitics in the 1970s, and Giorgio Agamben developed this hypothesis in his Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, published in English in 1998. Since these interventions, biopower and biopolitics have become indispensable as a theoretical point of reference in the humanities and social sciences. Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri argue that in the last thirty years the process of biopower and biopolitical regulation has increased, so much so that today every (...) aspect of social relation is subjected to the operations of this power. This chapter considers the position of biopower in the thought of Foucault and Agamben, and how the two conceive of power and resistance to power. It examines how biopower relates to sovereign power in both philosophers’ work, and specifically how Agamben’s development of Foucault’s thought is radical and offers a markedly different direction to scholarship on biopower and its relationship to sovereign power. Despite the relative age of Foucault’s writings, they continue to offer conceptual and theoretical tools for scholars in ways that Agamben’s theories and work do not. I use the example of the coronavirus pandemic to illustrate the shortcomings in Agamben’s thought. Finally, this chapter draws on recent work by Alexander Weheliye and Achille Mbembé to explore the close relationship between sexuality and race, and to show how both gender and race open up new avenues for exploring biopower and its relationship to sovereignty in the twenty-first century. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Time For Beginners:Natality, Biopolitics, and Political TheologyRosalyn Diprose and Ewa Płonowska ZiarekDespite The Growing Interest in Hannah Arendt’s idea of natality and its relationship to politics,1 natality is rarely discussed in the context of biopolitics.2 This is all the more puzzling since Arendt is not only a thinker of natality but also, as Agamben acknowledges in Homo Sacer, the first thinker of biopolitics (Agamben 1998, 3–4). While we (...) will elaborate the complexity of what these two terms mean shortly, a useful provisional definition of “natality” is birth as “event” and as the figure of a new beginning in political life. Michel Foucault defined “biopolitics” as the government of the biological life of a population where the state holds the right to life and death in terms of the power to “make live and … let die” (Foucault 2003, 254). We are interested in the relation between natality and biopolitics with regard to maternity in particular, first of all, because this intersection marks the site of some of the more surprisingly volatile conflicts of contemporary political life, and second, because the biopolitical regulation of giving birth raises the question of the fate of political transformation and agency within a biopolitical framework. This second point is illustrated by two relatively short-lived but volatile political events, one in Australia in December 2005–February 2006 and the other in the United States early in 2012.The Australian Case of Ru486A public debate erupted in Australia in late 20053 when, in an unprecedented move, four women senators from across the political party spectrum sponsored a “private members bill” to repeal the federal minister for health’s jurisdiction [End Page 107] over the licensing of RU486 (the so-called “home abortion pill”).4 The senators were protesting how the then conservative Australian government (the so-called Howard Government) was continuing to block the licensing of the drug despite Australia’s relatively liberal approach to surgical abortion, which has been legally available since the 1970s. The debate exposed how the Howard Government, in one of its first legislative acts after assuming power in 1996, had placed abortive agents such as RU486 under its own jurisdiction (instead of the independent body, the Therapeutics Goods Administration, which regulates all other drugs). Even though protest at this situation was well overdue by 2005, it was surprising that RU486 in particular became the focal point of contestation of government authority over life at that time. There were a number of other aspects of the government’s wider legislative agenda that were more publicly contested—harsh refugee policies, participation in the war in Iraq, draconian antiterrorism legislation, legislation deunionizing the labor market and tightening the marriage act to define marriage in terms of sexuality. Yet only RU486 succeeded in mobilizing a wave of defiance of prime ministerial authority sufficiently strong to push the debate in parliament to a rare “conscience vote” (a “free vote” that suspends the usual allegiance to one’s political party required in the Westminster system) and, even more rare, a vote that the prime minister and minister for health lost. Perhaps heartened by the success of this expression of dissent, others within the government (and the Labor opposition) began to challenge other aspects of the Howard Government’s conservative legislative agenda, eventually leading to a change of government in 2007.What does the RU486 event reveal about the relation between maternity, the politics of reproduction, political agency, and government of the life of a population? Why did administration of a home abortion pill become such a focus of dissent against totalizing government, sufficient to effectively reactivate democracy? And more specifically, what does this event say about political agency, biopolitics, and the significance of reproductive self-determination? Our second example illustrates the converse—the ever-present threat to close down women’s reproductive self-determination.The Case of the U.S. “Birth Control Mandate” of 2012In February and March 2012, the Republican Party presidential campaign veered off course from its disciplined focus on fixing the economic crisis and engaged instead what the media called “the war... (shrink)

This article aims to explore Kazuo Ishiguro’s Never Let Me Go within the Foucauldian theoretical framework in order to analyse the manifold biopolitical issues, namely cloning, by stretching the discourse to a speculative, dystopian posthuman scenario wherein the dominant, privileged, affluent human society replenishes them by incorporating bio-matter from the clones. The article also proposes to unfold the myriad ways the institutions, namely Hailsham and recovery centres in the novel, exercise power and execute power relations with the clones. It (...) describes the way these institutions turn out to be what Foucault calls the regimes of truth and how the clones choose to remain docile to the institutional power, and consequently, they turn out to be rich sites for both medical gaze and disciplinary gaze. Nevertheless, the article also details the procedures by which the bizarre truth of organ donation of the clones is buried under the technical discourse of good work. (shrink)

This paper analyzes two episodes of Foucault’s reading(s) of Hume’s philosophy. In both cases Hume is important to Foucault’s overall argument and aims. In particular, in both Foucault takes a fairly conventional philosophical description of Hume -- as a ‘skeptic’ and ‘empiricist’ -- for granted and shows that these disguise a world-historical significance. In section 1, the paper explores Hume's role in Foucault’s (1966) *The Order of Things*. The paper argues Hume stands in for the hidden role of similarity in (...) the human sciences of the so-called ‘classical period.’ The paper examines Hume’s account of relations which do not fully support Foucault’s claims about Hume. It is proposed that Foucault's reading is motivated by the role Hume plays in Husserl’s philosophy. In section 2, Foucault's treatment of Hume on March 28, 1979, during the eleventh lecture of the series known as *Birth of Biopolitics*, is analyzed. There Foucault ascribes to Hume’s account of the subject the key building blocks that allowed for the development of Benthamite radicalism and homo economicus. The paper situates Foucault’s later analysis of Hume in Foucault’s larger account of the development of the so-called radical (Benthamite) strain of liberalism that, on Foucault's telling, runs through Chicago economics. While Foucault’s account of Hume is anachronistic, this anachronism illuminates the building blocks of modern liberalism. (shrink)

,is article addresses the relationship between sovereignty, biopolitics and governmentality in the work of Giorgio Agamben, Judith Butler, and Michel Foucault. By unpacking Foucault’s genealogy of modern governmentality, it responds to a criticism leveled against Foucauldian accounts of power for their alleged abandonment of the traditional model of power in juridico-institutional terms in favor of an understanding of power as purely productive. ,is claim has most signi-cantly been developed by Agamben in “Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life”. I (...) argue that Judith Butler’s analysis of power, in particular in her essay “Inde-nite Detention”, presents a more di.erentiated account of power that registers the signi-cance of practices of sovereignty and resonates with Foucault’s lectures on “Security, Territory, Population”. (shrink)

A brief reconstruction of the birth, rise and ironical destiny of an almost universal expansion to other disciplines going with a dissolution within the original birthplace of the conception of an economic man, a male-only abstraction forgetful of its own abstract character.

Even if formally precise, the economic concept of rationality has different empirical implications depending on how it is used in theory building. If it is used as a tool of microfoundation in multi-level analysis it can be applied universally, but does not imply a specific model of human behavior. As a means of constructing microtheories proper it is, on the other hand, translated into a definite model of man but can be applied only to specific situations. This model, known as (...) homo oeconomicus or economic man, should not be taken as an assertion about human nature but rather as a shorthand description of the behavior enforced and stabilized by social situations of a certain type. (shrink)

Umweltmanagementsystems wird heute als eine Grundvoraussetzung vieler moderner Wirtschaftsunternehmen betrachtet. Bis in die 1980er Jahre dominierten Maßnahmen des nachsorgenden Umweltschutzes (End-of-the-Pipe-Technologien). Ab den 1990er Jahren verschob sich der Schwerpunkt hin zum vorsorgenden Umweltschutz. Hintergrund war das Aufkommen von Umweltmanagementsystemen. -/- Vernünftiges wirtschaftliches Handeln erfolgt unter den Bedingungen knapper Mittel zur Erreichung wirtschaftlicher Ziele (z. B. Nutzenmaximierung beim privaten Haushalt, Gewinnmaximierung beim Unternehmen). Dieser Grundsatz findet seinen Ausdruck im sogenannten Ökonomischen Prinzip. Das Ökonomische Prinzip (auch Wirtschaftlichkeitsprinzip) stellt auf ein möglichst günstiges (...) Verhältnis von Aufwand und Ertrag ab. Ausgangspunkt ist die Annahme, dass aufgrund der Knappheit der Güter die Wirtschaftssubjekte ihr wirtschaftliches Handeln so gestalten, dass die eingesetzten Mittel mit dem Ergebnis ins Verhältnis gesetzt werden und Akteure zweckrational so agieren, dass es im Ergebnis zu einer Nutzenmaximierung (meist im Sinne einer Gewinnmaximierung) kommt. -/- Inwiefern ist betrieblicher Umweltschutz also ein rationales Unternehmen? Eine solche Frage wirkt in Anbetracht der aktuellen Diskussion über Umweltbelange überraschend, scheint betrieblicher Umweltschutz doch heute ein grundsätzlicher Aspekt der wirtschaftlichen Aktivitäten von Unternehmen zu sein. Was unter Rationalität verstanden wird, hängt stets vom zugrunde gelegen Rationalitätskriterium ab. Das in der Ökonomik allgemein akzeptierte Rationalitätsprinzip ist das soeben besprochene Ökonomische Prinzip, demgemäß die Wirtschaftssubjekte eine Nutzenmaximierung (meist im Sinne einer Gewinnmaximierung) anstreben. -/- Das Modell eines nach dem Ökonomischen Prinzip handelnden Wirtschaftssubjekts ist das des sogenannten Homo oeconomicus. Es handelt sich hierbei um ein abstraktes Modell, das die wirtschaftliche Realität in ihrer Komplexität zwar nicht komplett darzustellen vermag, das dennoch als Grundlage für viele Erklärungen in der Wirtschaft dient. Das Modell des Homo oeconomicus lässt sich mit dem sogenannten "Gefangenendilemma" in Zusammenhang bringen. Interessanterweise offenbart das Gefangenen-Dilemma, bei dem die Spieler dominante (nutzenmaximierende) Strategien auch tatsächlich spielen, die Grundstruktur des Umweltproblems. (shrink)

Is it imaginable and convenient to apply the economic pattern of the so called »homo oeconomicus« on extraeconomical spheres? The author examines the question. The attraction of the pattern »homo oeconomicus« is the question of the logic of decision in situations of defiency. The author follows the key of the question at the reach and radius in differt spheres of application, for example the analysis of criminality and delinquency. Only in the extension of the social frame situation is (...) an economic reductionism of the social reality and the mutiple ways of human acting avoidable. (shrink)

At present, the structures, practice, and discourse of schooling are anchored to a “commercial spirit” that understands students, educators, and parents as economic operators trading competitively in human capital and to a discourse of failure that is disabling those who seek to understand and enact John Dewey's notion of education as democratic practice. Here Barbara Stengel illustrates both the commercial spirit in public schools and the discourse of school failure across two geopolitical settings: Shanghai, China, and urban U.S. schools. She (...) argues that framing the educational enterprise in terms of economic success and failure makes it difficult for educators to address Dewey's vision of democracy and education substantively. Stengel concludes with an acknowledgment that, regardless of putative political commitments, these two public school systems are schooling — though not often educating — the same neoliberal subject, but that Dewey's vision of democracy and education nonetheless remains critical and compelling. (shrink)