Background on Michel Foucault and Governmentality
Critically Analyse the Governmentality.
Michel Foucault was one of the most prominent philosophers of the modern century whose contributions surpassed philosophical boundaries. Foucault, during his career had published many monumental works on broad range of topics. Some of his works include, The Order of Things, The History of Sexuality, Society Must be Defended, The Birth of Biopolitics, and the Birth of the Clinic amongst several others. Apart from producing such seminal works, Foucault was also an active lecturer who used to give lectures in different universities globally.
The given essay discusses the article authored by Nikolas Rose, Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde in which they discuss the term ‘governmentality’ coined by Foucault. The chief purpose of this essay is to provide arguments and answers to the following major questions:
- What effect did Foucault’s ‘governmentality’ have on world politics?
- Can the term be linked to different contemporary forms of government?
- How has globalization influenced governmentality or has it been the reverse?
Governmentality as described by Foucault and interpreted by the authors refers to the organized practices through which citizens are governed[1].
As mentioned already, the article has been authored by Nikolas Rose,Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde. The authors have provided an overall review of the term and tried to relate it to the contemporary setting. In addition, the article has studied the advancement of political power in the said term and sketched its main features. It also analyzed the expansion of the concept and the means by which it managed to develop in the English-speaking and Western world. Many English theorists began incorporating this term in their writings and many others criticized the view but the concept had resounding effect in the political spheres. The article analyzed the key criticisms that were levied against governmentality. It further argued that in order to continue the productivity and creativity of the arts of government, governmentality has to be encouraged and made accessible to wider audiences.
Foucault spoke on governmentality during his lectures at College de France between 1977 and 1984. In those lectures, he explained the meaning of the term in detail and established its relevance to modern day politics. Governmentality is the art of government that is not confined only to state politics but it also encompasses other social institutions from schools, hospitals, families and so on. In the article, the authors have tried to link this art of government to Foucault’s idea of liberalism. According to Foucault, state the authors, liberalism is the art of government that surfaces as a detailed analysis of unwarranted governance, a means by which one searches for that technology of government that can address this extreme governance.
They further spoke about governmentality in relation to technologies, strategies and programs. The influence of Foucault’s lecture in the political spheres of England has also been discussed in the article. Foucault’s works were translated into English and his ideologies found shape in the ideas and thinking of many English liberals and political theorists. The authors cited the works of Colin Gordon who recognized the distinctiveness of Foucault’s approach in terms of the technological, strategic and programmed concepts. Further, the article focuses on Foucault’s ideas about governing subjects. Here, he highlighted on government of the self that is the belief that people have the power to govern themselves. In his essay, he drew attention towards this concept of subjectivity and stated that the central image of humanism that is the subjects would soon diminish and the state would emerge as the ultimate ruler.
Governmentality, Liberalism, and Biopolitics
In the later parts of the article, the authors discussed governmentality from the perspective of liberalism, advanced liberalism and welfarism. This was followed by locating and dispersing of governmentality, its legacy and its criticisms and response.
Governmentality gave rise to a sea of criticisms from contemporary and early theorists but it also received immense popularity and acceptance. Many scholars support this perspective of the art of governing and state that the government has all the right to look after not only the political, educational and social requirements of its citizens but also the biological requirements as well[2]. The biological governance refers to government control over the birth of a child, the health of the citizens and so on. Foucault referred this type of governance as an element of biopolitics. In the article, the authors have argued that governmentality never claimed to justify or present any systematic theory of politics that can be compared with contemporary theories. In addition, they also point out that if governementality is perceived as a toolbox in which some tools are good for some reasons and unworthy for others, then the trouble arises more as a constraint of the analysis than an examination of the limitations of governmental study.
Thomas Lemke[3] has been critical of the modern connotation and use of governmentality in his work centered on Foucault. He focused more on biopolitics and stated the confusion amongst modern practitioners whether to take politics as a notion that determines life or life as an object of politics. On the contrary, other scholars pointed out that the actual ideas and interests outlined by Foucault on biopower do not struggle with these contrasting positions[4]. They further iterate that this notion did not get the deserved appreciation from theorists who have been busy developing alternative conceptions of biopower to relate to the contemporary phenomena. However, Foucault’s discourse on biopolitics displays a balance between these two notions. He states that life constitutes none – the basis or object of politics. He rather puts forth life as the border of politics that must be respected and if needed, overcome.
Foucault’s discourse on biopolitics and governmentality has had its share of criticisms from other scholars as well[5], especially of the Soviet Union. The author criticized Foucault’s neglect of the Soviet socialism and defied his view of racism that he associated with the Soviet socialism. Foucault described Soviet socialism as indistinguishable to its dogmatic adversary in its biopolitical sagacity that he explained in expressions of racism. His theory leaves out the history of class struggle and hence is unable to provide an explanation of the biopolitical particularity of the Soviet paradigm.
Governmentality as discussed by Foucault is not a complete explanation of the art of government or liberalism and neo-liberalism, argue some authors[6]. The author points out that Foucault failed to include the works of Ludwig van Mises and Freidrich von Hayek who had made great contributions to the study of neo-liberalism. Foucault did give a different perspective of the emergence of neo-liberalism but it lacked the base as the works of these authors were hardly mentioned. His primary focus was on the neo-liberalism that was emerging in Germany and America[7].
Advancement in Political Power and Expansion of Governmentality
Many scholars especially during the era of modernism applied the concept of governmentality to diverse fields. To cite an example, resilience has been demonstrated as a form of governmentality that stresses on individual responsibility[8]. Scholars have defended the application of governmentality to resilience as it justifies neo-liberalism’s standard way of assembling social agents.
Some also argue that many critics have been unable to utilize fully Foucault’s ideas about liberalism in that they have inclined more towards political liberalism than economic liberalism that Foucault highlighted[9]. They further articulate that although deeper studies are required to implement fully Foucault’s governmentality into the realms of global politics, the approaches assure to add historically prosperous and analytically grounded breadth to international relations. They further argue that these approaches must not be disadvantaged by punitive reproaches[10].
Authors Nikolas Rose, Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde, have constituted a well thought out and well researched article on Foucault’s ‘governmentality’. They covered areas such as power, politics, state and subjectivity. Belonging to an English background, the authors have mostly assessed the influence of Foucault’s ideas in the English-speaking nations[11]. The article has majorly focused on the concept and its influence in the Western and European world and provided evidences from the early 18th to late 19th century. Further, they have provided a detailed analysis of the concept’s relevance to future governmental structure.
With a view to provide a different perspective of the concept, one must be firm with the original concept and then view it from the post-modern perspective. Foucault raised a complex question on governance and the need for government, be it of any form. He drew instances from the ancient times to the modern era up to the 19th century and questioned the reasons for the need of government[12]. Scholars since then have researched Foucault’s different works to produce a concrete solution to the problems raised by the philosopher.
In the present world, Foucault’s views and ideas have penetrated into the very system of governance. He talked about technologies and strategies of the government that laid the foundation of governmentality. A deep insight into the works of Foucault especially of biopolitics and governmentality, brings forth its association with popular theories such as Marxism. In fact, it can be said that governmentality is a culmination of the various theories proposed by the eminent political theorists of the past. Marxian theory propagated the emergence of a classless, stateless society where every individual produces and consumes what he or she deserves. Foucault mentioned this art of government in his lectures stating that this too is a technology formulated by the state to govern its population. However, this form of government does not include a single ruler rather hands over the power to the ones who deserve it as per their capability.
A modern perspective on governmentality discloses the aspects of neo-liberalism associated with the new governmental structures. Neo-liberalism refers to the stress on market as the technology for escalating competence of the government[13]. Evidences of neo-liberal ways of governance as identified by Foucault are found in the present governmental structures. Governments in today’s world have inclined more towards market economy rather than political economy. The nation with dominance in the world market has assumed the dominant stature and influence on other nations[14]. Foucault failed to realize the impact of globalization perhaps because it was a slowly emerging trend during 1970s and 1980s. However, globalization has shaped the way governments function in the present world. The Foucauldian principles of governmentality have been molded to adhere to the ever-changing technologies of the government through which they govern. In the views of Foucault, the state is anticipated to execute a succession of acts from the simple but strategic job to complex tasks like diverging economic decline, dealing with security risks whilst guaranteeing human rights[15]. Some parameters that define the success and failures of the state are these. Therefore, while globalization impact decentralizes state sovereignty and gives way to governance replacing government, the state turns into an object of assessment by economic power, in relation to its performance of governing societies[16].
Criticisms and Response to Governmentality
Another perspective through which Foucault’s governmentality is applied in the present context is the balance of knowledge and power between the ruler and the ruled. Although governments monitor and control the subjects, power resides in the hands of the subjects. Knowledge has perhaps been the most powerful in the past few decades that determined the fate of governments. This has been one of the central themes of Foucault’s lecture on biopolitics and governmentality[17].
It is apparent that the arts of government are separate from the techniques of governance, as Foucault observed[18]. This is visible in the modern societal structure as the government controlling the state and the population depends largely on economic organizations. Private firms are gaining access to more and more public departments thus enhancing the neo-liberal ways of governing[19]. The ideologies and principles of the arts of government proposed by Foucault found prominence much later after his death but managed to create a ripple in the political and economic spheres globally[20].
Conclusion
In the end, it needs to be stated that Michel Foucault left behind a rich source of political, economic, philosophical and social theory that are applicable in various sectors. Foucault presented a series of lectures at College de France and published seminal works as mentioned in the essay that transformed the notion of governance and politics as a whole. In the article that has been analyzed in the essay, Foucault’s concept of governmentality has been thoroughly discussed. In addition, the authors have linked the concepts with other political ideologies as liberalism, neo-liberalism, welfarism and so on. Further, the essay has presented a critical analysis of the work mentioned in the said article preceded by a brief summary. The essay has also presented an innovative interpretation of the article. The attempt has been to present an interpretation that is unique and entirely individualistic. In the interpretation, the concepts and ideas have been given a different dimension with applying these to the post-modern setup. Practical examples have been provided in order to authenticate the relevance of the concepts. The new age of governmentality is largely dependent on technology, as this aspect has dominated the present era like never before. However, this has also fueled the neo-liberal ideology of consumerism. Globalization, the aspect that was given least importance by Foucault has emerged as the revolutionary step taken by the nation-states.
References:
Baumgarten, Britta, and Peter Ullrich, ‘Discourse, Power, and Governmentality. Social Movement Research with and beyond Foucault’ (2016) Social Theory and Social Movements. Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 13-38
Busse, Jan, ‘Theorizing Governance as Globalized Governmentality: The Dynamics of World-Societal Order in Palestine’ (2015) 24.2 Middle East Critique 161-189
Campos, Ricardo, ‘Resisting Economic Globalization. Critical Theory and International Investment Law’ (2014) 827-832
Enroth, Henrik, ‘Governance: The art of governing after governmentality’ (2014) 17.1 European Journal of Social Theory 60-76
Foucault_Michel_Ethics_Subjectivity_And_Truth (2018) Monoskop.org https://monoskop.org/images/0/00/Foucault_Michel_Ethics_Subjectivity_and_Truth.pdf
Gane, Nicholas, ‘The emergence of neoliberalism: Thinking through and beyond Michel Foucault’s lectures on biopolitics’ (2014) 31.4 Theory, Culture & Society 3-27
Gros, Frédéric, ‘On Liberalism: Limits, the Market and the Subject’ (2017) Foucault and the Modern International, Palgrave Macmillan US 191-201
Governmentality and Biopolitics
Hamilton, Scott, ‘Add Foucault and stir? The perils and promise of governmentality and the global’ (2014) 1.2 ERIS–European Review of International Studies
Joseph, Jonathan, ‘Resilience as embedded neoliberalism: a governmentality approach’ (2013) 1.1 Resilience 38-52
Joseph, Jonathan, ‘The Hegemony of Governmentality: Towards a Research Agenda’(2017) 6.2 All Azimuth 5
Lemke, Thomas, Monica J. Casper, and Lisa Jean Moore, ‘Biopolitics: An advanced introduction’ (2011) NYU Press
Mourad, Roger Philip, ‘Social Control and Free Inquiry: Consequences of Foucault for the Pursuit of Knowledge in Higher Education’ (2017) British Journal of Educational Studies 1-20
Patton, Paul, ‘Foucault’s’ Critique’of Neoliberalism, Rawls and the Genealogy of Public Reason’ (2013) 80.80 New Formations 39-51
Prozorov, Sergei, ‘Foucault and Soviet biopolitics’ (2014) 27.5 History of the Human Sciences 6-25
Rabinow, Paul, and Nikolas Rose, ‘Biopower today’ (2006) 1.2 BioSocieties 195, 217.
Rakopoulos, Theodoros, ‘From Crisis to Resistance?‘Exception’, Neo-liberalism, and Two Voices in the Left’ (2016) 133-141
Rose, Mitch, ‘Negative governance: vulnerability, biopolitics and the origins of government’ (2014) 39.2 Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 209-223.
Rose, Nikolas, Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde, ‘Governmentality’ (2006) 2 Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 83-104
Schiavo, Lidia Lo, ‘Sovereignty, Governmentality, Globalization and the Crisis of the State. Re-Telling the Story Backwards: A FoucauldianAnalysis’ (2015) 3.1 Journal of Social Science for Policy Implications 1-18
Vrasti, Wanda, ‘Universal but not truly ‘global’: governmentality, economic liberalism, and the international’ (2013) 39.1 Review of International Studies 49-6
Nikolas Rose, Pat O’Malley, and Mariana Valverde, ‘Governmentality’ (2006) 2, 83 Annu. Rev. Law Soc. Sci. 100
Frédéric Gros, ‘On Liberalism: Limits, the Market and the Subject’ (2017) Foucault and the Modern International. 191 Palgrave Macmillan US 201.
Thomas Lemke, Monica J. Casper, and Lisa Jean Moore, Biopolitics: An advanced introduction (2011) 33 NYU Press 52.
Paul Rabinow and Nikolas Rose, ‘Biopower today’ (2006) 1.2, 195 BioSocieties 210.
Sergei Prozorov, ‘Foucault and Soviet biopolitics’ (2014) 27.5, 6 History of the Human Sciences 23
Nicholas Gane, ‘The emergence of neoliberalism: Thinking through and beyond Michel Foucault’s lectures on biopolitics’(2014) 31.4, 3Theory, Culture & Society 25.
Paul Patton, ‘Foucault’s’ Critique’of Neoliberalism, Rawls and the Genealogy of Public Reason’ (2013) 80.80, 39 New Formations 50.
Jonathan Joseph, ‘Resilience as embedded neoliberalism: a governmentality approach’ (2013) 1.1, 38 Resilience 52.
Wanda Vrasti, ‘Universal but not truly ‘global’ governmentality, economic liberalism, and the international’ (2013) 39.1, 49 Review of International Studies 59.
Britta Baumgarten and Peter Ullrich, ‘Discourse, Power, and Governmentality, Social Movement Research with and beyond Foucault’ (2016) Social Theory and Social Movements, 13Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden 3
Foucault_Michel_Ethics_Subjectivity_And_Truth (2018) Monoskop.org <https://monoskop.org/images/0/00/Foucault_Michel_Ethics_Subjectivity_and_Truth.pdf>.
Henrik Enroth, ‘Governance: The art of governing after governmentality’ (2014) 17.1, 60 European Journal of Social Theory 76
Theodoros Rakopoulos, ‘From Crisis to Resistance?‘Exception’ (2016) 133 Neo-liberalism, and Two Voices in the Left 140.
Scott Hamilton, ‘Add Foucault and stir? The perils and promise of governmentality and the global’ (2014) ERIS–European Review of International Studies 1.2.
Mitch Rose, ‘Negative governance: vulnerability, biopolitics and the origins of government’ (2014) 209 Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers 39.2 223
Lidia Lo Schiavo, ‘Sovereignty, Governmentality, Globalization and the Crisis of the State. Re-Telling the Story Backwards: A FoucauldianAnalysis’ (2015) 1 Journal of Social Science for Policy Implications 3.1 18.
Roger Philip Mourad, ‘Social Control and Free Inquiry: Consequences of Foucault for the Pursuit of Knowledge in Higher Education’, (2017) 1 British Journal of Educational Studies 18.
Jonathan Joseph, ‘The Hegemony of Governmentality: Towards a Research Agenda’ (2017) All Azimuth 6.2, 5.
Ricardo Campos, ‘Resisting Economic Globalization, Critical Theory and International Investment Law’, (2014) 832.
Jan Busse, ‘Theorizing Governance as Globalized Governmentality: The Dynamics of World-Societal Order in Palestin’, (2015) 161 Middle East Critique 24.2 169
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
