RSU Theory – Michel Focault

alright well thanks for having me to come here and speak about this topic I’m just going to be reading right off this so if you don’t get a I contact it’s not because I hate you some of you may have heard the name Michele Foucault where others of you have not however I doubt there is anyone this room that hasn’t heard or even been influenced by his ideas in your own critical examinations of our society this is not say that you would agree with this notions or knowledge of power or his methodologies of genealogy but the residue of his ideas permeates in academic circles even amongst those who hold themselves to be the movers and shakers of today’s society out of the many recasting xin histories of who co-produced the one that you may be liable to hear a word or my meaning is a certain application the government allottee called bio politics Maya politics is a particular element of the coast thought that I didn’t ask you to speak about today foucault points out a play-doh and his own lecture series known as the birth of iPolitics that biopolitics is fastly connected liberalism to quote only when we know what the governmental regime called liberalism was will we be able to grasp what biopolitics is the codes roadmap to serve extents will be our own roadmap however before we even do this and in order to make the co snow shin of liberalism in the biopolitics more intelligible it is important to render a little more background off the coast intellectual work so that we won’t drown in an ocean of unfamiliar concepts or methods in order to first grasp the intellectual pieces of Michel Foucault’s it is informative to know how uses a particular methodology rendering the past called genealogy whereas a lot of other more popular philosophers claim to carry on the work of a great intellectual for father or otherwise explicitly much might be said about the coast relationship with Frederic Nietzsche the code says in many places that he is in fact vinicio a Nietzschean this omission takes on several admissions and stripes directors because career as an intellectual but as far as published writings no practice of Nietzsche comes through quite as strongly as that practice that Foucault used from NIMH known as genealogy in HS genealogy of morals the examination of moral reasoning and effects are examined from the perspective of that particular frame time rather than as a logical perspective which is the more traditional approach to history traditional approach could be characterized as an attempt to understand history by recasting through its current ideology to render a coherent story complete with heroes events and foreshadowing from the very beginning of foucault’s work it is important for him to examine history according to the reasons and evidence inherent to that particular time the thinking and reasoning provided by various persons accounts pieces of arts and other artifacts provide their own history and their own reasoning because first book history of m├ętis inaugurated this method of genealogy which showed the knowledge and order of history from the Renaissance to the beginning of the 20th century this book showed the genealogy of how each shift in the needs of society changed its understandings boundaries and treatments from the altar truth of madness since his first book fucose genealogical method has been used almost without exclusion is that exploratory books often creating a space for history knowledge of power where before only more narrow interpretations previously existed to take a slightly more applicable topic at hand the genealogical approach that makes fucose approached the stark contrast between liberalism and neoliberalism and the associate hard turn to buy politics it’s what makes it so elegant indeed Foucault had this specifically to stay on his analysis of liberalism biopolitics so what I would like to deploy here is exactly the opposite of historicism not questioning not questioning Universal by using history as a critical method but by starting from the definition at Universal not exist and asking what type of history with the deal this brings me to the other piece that is important to the understanding before moving onto biopolitics which is understanding of knowledge of power when one studies Foucault it becomes quickly apparent that knowledge of power share this joint or similar sort of relationship that space and time and join Einstein like physics this is so much the case that the understanding of the co often leaves the user saying something like knowledge slosh powder where sometimes one word is used that apply together the co implores us in someone’s either earlier writings we should abandon the whole tradition that allows us to imagine that knowledge can exist only where power relationships

are suspended and knowledge can develop outside of its injunctions it demands it’s in its demands and its interests perhaps we should have been in the belief that power makes us mad and by thats a joke and the renunciation of power is one of the conditions for knowledge we should have but rather that power produces knowledge not simply by encouraging it or by believing that it’s apply because it’s useful then that power power and knowledge directly apply one another that there is no power relationship without a correlative constitution of a field of knowledge this concept is seemingly easy for some deGrasse by others failed to grasp its deeper implications I’d like to demonstrate a popular misunderstanding of this for the purposes of clarity of course we’re all familiar with the cliched phrase knowledge is power which is phrase the chance at NBC or at the end of GI Joe or something the is of the sense of is here is use best fence notion of the is of cause that is to say if I have knowledge then I can have some sort of modem control greater than ad previously sort of like getting an answer to the Sphinx’s riddle for the purposes of saving thieves but this is precisely what Foucault doesn’t mean knowledge power from Co isn’t something that is some Grand Wizard dictates from some top unitary vision Howard’s everywhere not because it embraces everything but because it comes everywhere everything in a certain sense creates and reinforces knowledge who are you are you normal are you deviant what gender are you are you rational what is that thing you’re holding you can see that these basic questions of intelligibility not grant and some nefarious sense necessarily into some power but it’s a modality behavior questions and positions in the regards the way we know ourselves but also the way we also rented or render the universe tell dab’ll with this is a jumping point we can get a glimpse of the sort of inseparable relationship that knowledge and power enough to cope it’s Ford and now with these two basic concepts in air valve where to achieve a closer order to the top of you can as many of you know already liberalism and capitalism share a lot of history together but you also know that it’s unnecessary for one another in fact liberalism was something that came later after capitalism had been jump-started the beginnings of bio power that is to say a knowledge and discipline of bodies at any different origin also had a different origin from liberalism schedules kept by months made use of a clock that contracted minutes and precise hours at the time of its development was virtually worthless devil else because nobody had they need to regulate the day to wait amongst desire a little further in the future independently the bottle uniformity of lead newly generated musket units spread all over Europe none of which had nothing to do with capitalism or liberalism at all with time biopower spread over all different major institutions it should seem intuitive that biopower aims to make big more efficient in an economic sense almost as if I’d fall though the beginning solved many uses for many different ends in the army the end was efficiency in other institutions like prisons the end of aisle power was morality and corrections in school bio power was exercised for assessment and guidance and all this goes on eventually we see the continued socialization of labor as persistent drive for efficiency starting to increase for more highly efficient disciplined bodies the use of bio power on the workshop is inevitable to quote biopower without a question was indispensable element the development of capitalism’s the latter would have been impossible without the controls insertion of bodies into machinery of production and the adjustment of the phenomena of the population to the economic process so what’s all this about bio power and bio politics are they the same thing the quicken on the careful answer is no they are related though it’s historically relevant that I bring up biopower and I promise it isn’t a distinction merely brought up for the purposes of grandiosity as we know for Foucault power is not top-down the particular configuration of bio power has two sorts of branches the first of these is developing a certain knowledge and control of micro control over bodies it works on the level uniformity of bottling capacities efficiencies and usefulness in a word procedures that will towards da facility which should be understood as a process of domestication rather than submissiveness the second is the genus the genus the biopower focuses on the body still but instead of working on a micro or individual level works on the level of groups or population no

stud works on this level of biopower is less than the level of this a fork and this is how its use and more along the lines of birth control sexuality health and morality this may seem somewhat vague but there are a couple of examples in this type of knowledge that are more easily recognizable in our current era think for instance all the societal knowledge about depression who has what does one do when one has it how does one avoid there’s a whole discourse on hell that is strangely deinstitutionalized that runs parallel to the more official version yes loses none of its veracity the second type of boggle power becomes politics but the catalyst for this unique type of power changes event corine the shift of knowledge of economics and reorders and changes truth mechanisms that how our society runs and a word it becomes biopolitics when it seems a more dominant effect of a liberal style of government allottee before liberalism the marketplace was a site of justice the various kings all over Europe fadhli fairly had fairly tight regulation over the price of goods in their respective kingdoms which is suiting given that the tax a tied system a female ism left service with very controlled share of things as a result the merchant classes kept tightly under thumb and it was illegal to some prices too high to keep presidents fed etc probably liberalism the sovereign practices style and theory of government allottee that at the heart might be referred to as the will takane or slightly before liberal government holiday the will of the state juris courts monarchy and other sort of experts creating a sort of verification of truth of the soffit the King acted accordingly or correctly insofar as fulfilling its kingly duties such a knowledge of proper rulership sounds entirely to itself to referential in a way allowed for sort of unlimited purview the solder in another way it it told the game how was that he was supposed to rule markets for instance is not merely the right but also the duty to administrate particularly the theory of wealth locked in this sort of style of government ality the knowledge of wealth of the time was that it was always a zero-sum game only the only way that wealth could be gained is by had from another king by either taking it or trading it with other nations there was no obsession with efficiency no mutually advantageous benefit everything was done as the web the king it was largely the work of economic intellectuals during of time that changed this history of well changed theory of wealth which over time literally reordered the way that people lived their lives and in particular relationship to the sovereign more notably it was the physiocrats who believed that wealth was at its heart had to do with agricultural production who introduced this new knowledge which is now recognized as political economics as opposed to the previous theory of health wealth the physiocrats believe that efficiency productivity was not just a zero-sum game economically as a result of concomitant effort as a result with the concomitant hundreds of juris creating an effect of getting the sovereigns of various nations to unregulated markets what is remarkable about the physiocrats is how they created a new sort of language of naturalness and truth endemic to that time and that period of economics dudes very various influences of modernism and such the code summarizes their findings as such when you allow the market to function by itself according to its nature according to its natural truth if you like it permits the formation of a certain price which will be called metaphorically the true price and will sometimes be called the just price but which no longer has been a connotation of justice this change of the theory of wealth however only started to affect government aldi within its currents discourse that it were residing the reasoning was still the old one it’s best for the King to open up the markets so that is what we done often through a series of deaths kuz revolution and sometimes even a more gradual pace the different theory of government ality began to take hold in addition to this era where we see the disappearances of the sovereign both formally and informally the whole purpose of the government be formulated around a different set of purposes questions and techniques Co explains the question of critical governmental reason will turn out not to be to govern too much the objection will no longer be the abuse of sovereignty but to excess government and by its reference to excess government or to any rate the delimitation of what would be excessive for government is what makes it possible to gauge the rationality of governmental practice from this point on it is not merely a government but also its critics

or its citizens who judge the government primarily based on the scope of success or failure rather than legitimate a lot of legitimacy or illegitimacy perhaps one of the most studied figures of the age of Liberal government LD has to be the most popular pamphleteer of the 18th century Thomas Paine who in at least two aspects of course we may or may not be aware that Thomas page discussed for the sovereign power but what makes him so compelling as a picture of this time was first as strong physio cratic leanings and the other to the extent that he thought that a free and open markets with not only the responsibility of the state but also the belief that blocking the natural market would lead inevitably tilt despotism at the war consequently this is also a position that count holds in his essay on perpetual peace now I think it is important to be clear on the assertion for all the deviations of liberalism especially in the 19th century what we almost never sees the changing of the main questions or purposes of governments at this point for instance in the United States was all pharrell about free trade at first not more than a decade later it turns around all practices for protectionism we can always smile wryly though only when we know it is understood that the reasons are in fact to keep the local markets free and to maintain the natural balance of revellers in fact more to the point the correct actions of the government for this or that tariff is justified precisely through a liberal discourse of keeping the natural balance to the market again Foucault explains in other words it is the natural price that enables us to falsify and verify governmental practice win on the basis of these elements we examine what government does the measures that it takes the rules that imposes in a sense and as much as enables production need supply demand value in price etc to be linked together the market constitutes a site of air addiction which grooming itself your true it is interesting to hear people talk about the freedoms that were enjoyed as a result in terms of you return from feudalism and to a certain extent Sean credit should be given to liberalism in its in its advances the genesis of problems that evoke the talk about primal beginning and original contracts are not only completely highly illogical but suffer from being endemic to the times that they were created prior even though the talk about Hobbes is life liberty and property the only talk indeed the only intelligible speech on rights was the right of kings which talked about things like mine by right of conquest and other such pleasantries this little detour of our rights and freedoms does have a purpose though jenny ology shows that the freedom of liberalism ins are constructed Foucault illuminates so freedom in the regime of liberalism is not a given it’s not a ready-made region that has to be respected or if it is it is so only partially regionally in this case or that case cetera freedom something which must be constantly produce liberal is not acceptance of freedom it proposes to manufacture constantly to arouse it to produce it with of course the constraints and the problems of the cost raised bites of production what then will be the principal calculation for the cost of this manufacturing of freedom the principle of calculation will be called security now from a null moralizing point of view it’s obvious to infer that genealogy shows us that our desires for certain configuration of freedom is highly manufactured by knowledge power that informs us a certain utopian of liberalism is achieved as a result what are the freedoms what is the maximum horizon of freedom etc that is not hypocritical to impose some is not in hypocritical to impose some intervention on liberal government’s as hard to maintain the freedoms through their face of security which fair to say that eligibly would be like it’s not an all hyper critical for classical liberalism to create all sorts of weird securities because they are the alternative phase with the freedoms that it creates it’s a it’s a necessary component even in the middle of this all sets of a hands-off heyday of classical liberalism we see that biopower this time at the form of biopolitics starts to take some effects the look as liberalism providing the discourse of knowledge of freedom it also is necessary with its definition of freedom creating provide security when this is mentioned it conjures up police protecting rich people’s rights and of course file basis to it also means that it’s applied in a more subtle ways for instance one of the guarantees of the mark that the markets will remain free in their natural state is a commodity called labour and that is important that it remains plentiful now I think I know where some of you think we’re going with

this but again I need to remind you that disciplinary knowledge even if this particular configuration of biopolitics doesn’t come from the top down north along cursive I want to use two examples of reproduction of population the first of which is European and the second which remains a lot closer to home in terms of this type of security created in Europe and especially in England they’re developed at the timing new knowledge of the family the effects of the purposes came from all over the map moral health being the most genuine and the most primary family as many of which have been chased from the countryside only generations earlier lived in domiciles the way that they did rural areas but they were encouraged by educators clergy and even sometimes by ordinance to make sure their family slept in different beds and that boys and girls had their own room etc houses and apartments that they could rent we’re all constructed in a certain way to encourage this new division of the family and from a capitalist standpoint this acclimated families to round-the-clock shift work and separated each member it is at the time that institution like the church started pre starting preaching heavily against the sexual practice commonly referred to now as pulling out where previously and for sort of reasons there was no such reason to do so doing so at all levels using biopower we were able to create a form of security and maintain the new needs for new freedoms through domestication the second more local example to utah valley university is the practice of polygamy to the immigrants that came to the state for mormons never had the comment replenish your taken on such a strong injunction as did when the mormons entered what is now you talk the encouragement of polygamy in utah was a clear need to maintain security that the mormons needed both economics and in the political sense to survive the practice of polygamy in Utah’s a small cosmos of biopolitics parts alone again it wasn’t merely a top-down religious institution that allowed and encouraged it affects affected all facets of life the way that they work together the buildings that they built and of course the way they took care on another in terms of welfare even now we can see that some of the knowledge and disciplines of the family still expose their disparate nature where you toss stills1 a few places that in the u.s. that has large family sizes again power is extremely decentralized and can be contributed to the existence of continued popularity of costco as much as it is any religion but i digress here we have a very probable example biopolitics in his eyes on economy and security united states in the 19th century up until this moment I have only alluded to the classes and differences between liberal style and color mentality and capitalism however when we start the very beginning of the 20th century America we start to see the necessity of bio power has the Capitals and pick on their somewhat larger role especially in the cases of public education of health the liberal economist of time so that is necessarily developed what they deemed human capital but to treat genealogy seriously the development of both education health was greatly bolstered by both andrew carnegie and john dee runk rockefeller for genuinely different and phil romik reasons when we examine the expansion of biopolitics we should recognize a couple of important things here first is that though these figures were both ruthless capitalists and as a result laid down the stonework for industrial expansion that in there later life genuine they had a genuine goal of welfare the purpose of Education was actually to liberate and they were serious about that what remains crucial here is it not these two giving what remains crucial here is not these two making an effort to privatize everything but exactly the opposite to budge to bolster a fledgling public educational model thereby even though through the scope of liberal charity it is still an expansion of welfare and a per view the state here power emanates from the places other than from the state or from business it comes from churches philanthropists and even old-school evolutionists even so we see an increasing development of biopolitics but a slow chiseling away of the sort of freedoms of classical liberalism especially in from the political economic perspective and then also bolstering of capitalism which shows a split the Liberal government ality of this classical variety ran into a few snags or upstarts in the relationship to new knowledge a–‘s and the new relationship of ruling here in the United States we experience a very rosy maturation of capitalism continuing through the Gilded Age and even farms the great depression because as you recall Hoover dearly adhere tightening to Liberal government housing the name of freedom and even in the name of security but the introduction of Keynesian style and economics started to

challenge not so much liberal government ality but the precepts of political economics in the face of disaster the old model the government that governs least governs best was falling out of favor style with the government and reconfigured security over in Europe liberal government ality had several bumps in the road as well the major challenges being both prussia and then later on german of course I’m referring to Bismarck’s social insurance programs later on National Socialism in the cases of the Liberals in Europe they fought fiercely against both programs and in the case whether made any individuals are actually chased out of the country prior to the Third Reich’s rise to power the German academics of the liberal political economy enjoyed something that resides between a renaissance and a crisis around Europe they saw strong term to government intervention do the perceiver end up of communism and a self-destructive behavior of capitalism power here seem to be reversing the reversed flow on political economy rather than the normal political economy too liberal government Alex giving political economy to Liberal government telling the icon a consequent rallying point of this theoretical shift was a journal called order in because birth biopolitics these new styles liberals are merged in early part of the 20th century as Europe were known as the or no liberals but for the purpose of this lecture will concatenate them to their American counterparts the neoliberals this is because they mostly have everything in common except for where they live for instance a lot of steam picked up just as an example a lot of steam picked up on the American side of American X on the American side of neoliberalism around the same time when an order of liberal by the name of frigid lund Hayek was chased out of Germany and eventually found his way easily fitted into the united states chicago school just for one example the neoliberal / themselves to new stock the new types of markets and fledgling government allottees but some of the tenants of classical liberalism had to be consigned to the past on a roughly fair analysis we could say that the problem was to demonstrate that capitalism was still possible and could survive if any form was invented for it their proposition was that only know of liberals could save capitalism this is of course why they’re called neo liberals because they have a strong demarcation that lies in the idea that there are no natural markets the new job of the government is to promote competition and to secure freedom for comer marks that they say Leslie fair cannot and must not be the conclusion drawn for the principal competition as the organizing farm of the market why not because they say if you deduce the principle of less a fair from a market economy basically you’re still the grips of one is called naive naturalism as such neoliberalism should not therefore be identifiable as a fair but rather with permanent vigilance activity and intervention here we’re going to see that the neoliberal conception fits more neatly into our current style of government allottee as opposed to the classical liberal approach it might also illuminate why people who cry about the free market and government intervention seem to be missing the point even though they appear both liberal and capitalists this is because they are chasing the ghosts of capitalism past the neoliberal argument prior to World War two obviously did not hold much sway after the war however the Liberals couldn’t ask for more in ideal conditions they argued that Kenzie and style interventions and that any style of government aldi that didn’t protect competition and market was doomed to either Nazism or communism they ended up with a perfect storm of influences albia for different reasons around the world the examination of proliferation had filled another relationship that’s another task here neoliberalism has the catalytic effect on biopolitics the reason that this midst this proliferation of biopolitics so easy is due to the way that neoliberalism generate subjectivity classical liberalism according to neoliberalism misses the point of labour in its analysis of labour classical liberalism turns to labour as an ideologically abstract labor power it turns it into a commodity and makes it intelligible the logic capital you know liberals new liberals claim that the abstraction of Labor as it occurs is not due to real capitalism but is as a result of classical economic theory itself in the past people follow the contrived logic of capital which created the abstract labor into labor power the neoliberal say that capitals requires new logics so that can unshackle labor from this old model the classical economists studies of economics as a relationship to

production exchange and consumption and the interrelatedness of the three domains in a given social structure for the neoliberal economists and quote economics is a science of human behavior as a relationship have ends and scarce beans which have mutually exclusive uses Africa exactly economics is therefore not analysis of processes is analysis of activities so there’s no longer an analysis of a historical logic of processes it’s the analysis of internal rationality and strategic programming of people’s individual activity consequentially the questions are purview of labor ennio liberalism is not asking what is the good price for labor or what is the labor value that’s forged into this commodity but rather it’s it puts ourselves in the shoes of the worker asked questions like how do I work what decisions do I make what does my word work mean to me and how do I evaluate this has the strange effect of removing them working for the picture of analysis we do not have questions of the social relationships or mechanisms between people but instead occupy some place economically where those relationships to the worker is hidden from view this changes the game significantly I can’t ask questions like what is a fair wage i can only ask questions like what is a fair wage to me these basic questions or rather answers to these questions have been provided form a new knowledge of economics the reasoning goes like this from a personal point of view a wage for me is just another form of income and income by definitions just a return on capital capital is just a resource that can be used to produce future income thus the reasoning continues such that I have an income stream in a certain sense capitalists I am a capitalist that produces cap though I am a special form of capital because I’m inseparable from my own production of capital by this analysis you aren’t a worker who sells his labor for a wage as this again would only put you at a level mechanism but precisely the individual classical liberalism disappears Co explains the idea of the basic element to be deciphered by economic analysis is not so much the individual or the processes or mechanism but enterprises an economics an economy made up of enterprise units the society made 0 enterprise units is once at once the principle decipherment liked to liberalism and its programming for the rationalization of society and economy so to the neoliberal you are an enterprise Homo economicus here now we send our chairs and we can remember the discourse as it talks about us as a business rather than a person in the classical sense we invest in our children’s futures we think that education is a good investment what marketable skills do I have these phrases give human capital a whole new dimension with a liberal government ality that is informed by neoliberalism the states are quite different the previous counterpart government ality is measured and tested on its ability to protect can incite competition in the market the previous what wisdom of governing in the least still rings true but only insofar as it incites the market further the new liberalism requires that government have permanent vigilance activity and intervention in order to create the security of competition biopolitics does not work on the level of individuals it works on the level of populations and if we have this modified theory of government aldi 23 subject devising forces of homo economicus we have a sort of ideal collusion between these two similar approaches new bony liberals make let’s make a severe brave with the examination of human subjectivity and reason from that of say Italian Renaissance but it’s still humanists in a way and in some ways is hyper humanistic with neoliberalism all the questions are nominated in the subject of it is to be very sure a different form of humanism from a4a but it concerns itself of the study of the individual scientifically even as an enterprise the collusion of biopolitics work similarly with neoliberal subjectivity because they both share the similar knowledge of the body with biopolitics and economic security population and with neoliberalism it is i er to protect competition and enterprises the of course are not equivocal but one notice that they seem somewhat complementary in their knowledge and effects off people if we compare this with classical liberalism with its injunction against personal intervention by a power over population seems so much inert or even contradictory to this liberal capital the role this classical liberalism there may be some of you that adopt the penetration of neoliberal subjectivity

in various non-economic domains I’ve already alluded to some of these seemingly unlikely domains but I wanted to make it more explicit in order to show how particularly well biopolitics works in the frame and scope of neoliberalism as Foucault says America neoliberalism still involves in fact the generalization of the Economic Forum of the market it involves generalizing it through the social body including to hold the social system that’s not even usually conducted our sanctions by monetary exchanges thus all the problems of say health care or public hygiene for example must be at any rate or can be rethought as elements of may elements that may or may not approve human capital it is interesting to see the pervasiveness of this new subjectivity take healthcare fragrance for instance now it is easy to see where the monetary side of neoliberal subjectivity comes in that is easy enough at a certain level to discern what becomes particularly interesting is the non-economic sites but the knowledge generated by non-economic side of health care ish we have no surprise to anyone that in the United States rates itself is number one in other countries for healthcare as an outsider one might ask how its said that that could be honest at all but believe it or not due to the way the measure things it is for most of the rest of the world the success of a health care system examines its ability to keep a population healthy it measures overall system’s ability to keep a populate to maintain or distribute health care in the United States the primary metric for determining the success is customer satisfaction how do I really relate to my health care am I satisfied with the performance statements like seventy-nine percent of Americans feel like health care treats them satisfactorily or better constitutes a form of knowledge about health care these questions should be familiar because they are the types of usually associated with economic transaction but it’s worth delineating these questions are not questions as to whether or not it’s worth their money well whether or not you how you great health care to solve the survey style which became popular about the same time as the rise of neoliberalism neoliberal economics so is the subjective relativity athlete it is often typical that a survey will be on any given topic will contain the all too ambiguous one through five scale one example of asking something might be along the lines of rain today followed by one to five bubbles don’t notice some strange things about this first it’s not a question second there are only two answers to the question free if you include di don’t know option and if you’re trying to it seems like you’re trying to ascertain the taper as to whether or not he has to see whether however with a neoliberal subjectivity the thing that is being measured is not if you know the answer but your relatability to the phrase how does this agree to you how does this make you react the rise in effects of survey especially in politics is a telling term telling in terms of knowledge and subsequent determination of the truth want like a need the penetration of the survey this matter of rendering this penetration of the surveys is rendering you as an object of knowledge is not merely in the domain of customer satisfaction but is even used in things like psychological assessment just to throw one more concrete example of how neoliberalism is applied to anything under the Sun here in the United States you only need to look at the American solution for reducing carbon emissions the solution of the problem seems only natural that air previously never dreamt as being object of trade or competition translates into a commodity so that we can solve the problem the problem thus can be solved by opening up new avenues of competition with kids can make everything better by its technological innovations the government here is doing its job according to Liberal government allottee products alone before we wrap up I think it’s paramount to address a few concerns about people’s uses of bio politics and in doing so clarify what biopolitics is not when one studies two codes by politics it’s worth pointing out to the extent of how limited it is due to the definition that’s provided it’s highly contingent biopolitics is under the genus of bio power which shares which it shares with micro power or what is known as there’s this course of an individual bodies to movements there’s also a third type of bio power that is a micro power but also works on populations rather than the individual level but isn’t under the purview of political economics this circuit category isn’t explicitly named well perhaps if you’re more comfortable with ambiguity you might like non micro disciplinary powers if we were filling out a diagram biopolitics of begin said that particular distinction with the dotted line to Liberal government ality so that there’s a little

I wish I had a blackboard to show to you and it is actually relevant in the context of this presentation at the Revolutionary Students Union I would like to talk a moment about the way that people use him in analysis and sparking revolution most of the mistakes come from the misunderstanding of the COS notion of power which I’ve already talked about briefly the whole elaborate or people have pitfalls to my knowledge and my confidence on this is fairly high knowledge theory of the codes theory of power does not permit an outside to power in fact the knot that forms knowledge power doesn’t allow there to be a power outside either because explicit about this is later work where for instance here’s a in a later book history of sexuality going alone where there’s power there is resistance and yet or rather consequently this resistance is never going to position of x 2 r.d in the relationship to counter their existence depends on a multiplicity of points of resistance these play the role of adversary target support and handle power relations these points of resistance our presence everywhere in the power network the misunderstanding of the outside power usually stems from misunderstanding the phookas project often these are those who can see this work as a provocation to find some sort of outside platform to reside or some sort of outside platform to launch resistance from but on the issues of outside powers is only fair intellectually to learning between those that think there must be an outside power to those that merely wish it with the case the second mistake is that people are liable to make is seen for seeing genealogy is forward-looking genealogies as I have indicated the beginning of this lecture is very reliant on historical analysis and it might be said is inimical an intrinsically interior determining the truth of any particular moments requires an evaluation of various artifacts of time the books yard the music the reports speeches etc and how those conferences speech how those tokens speak to the discourse or truth of that moment one thing that stands out particularly about genealogists fundamental about its fundamental inability to determine the cause or the change in knowledge power it is not capable but in addition is not interested in it for instance in the case of liberal government ality Foucault says I do not think that we need to look for and consequently I don’t think that when you define the cause of the Constitution of the market as an agency of their addiction if we take the abilities of genealogy all the way to its limit it may be helpful determining what knowledge power is working at this very moment but it’s worth pointing out as well that genealogy to this extent is excellence what apartments do that being said it’s an ability to find or analyze that revolutionary moment makes its applicability to those particular causes virtually zero I know that some of you may have some questions about certain thinkers I’ll be happy to answer those questions in the Q&A immediately after I’m done which is really soon okay home stretch some of you may be cooking up a genealogical analysis of your own and concerns to our contemporary society I would take these last moments to take fucose own reasoning of biopolitics to the N SI in the beginning of the lecture biopolitics to something that happens with bio power is exposed to Liberal government ality however due to various accomplishments insecurity of capitalism in the forms of production we notice a whole new rash of developments in the forms of knowledge concerning the multiplicity of domains especially with the advent of in technologies if we look at the needs of a security and competition we can see that the parameters security has in fact change that being said I think there’s a fair amount of reason especially in the recent economic recession to believe that the intervention and incitement of competition is still the main goal at least here in the United States thus the foot width of bukharian analysis seems that liberal government ality is still here full force alright we’ll take questions now for the crowd or from the population the population is relative you know they can do the same thing all right shoot who’s got a question for for being my interpretation of the code all right then I guess one of the things we talked about how could you provide my own power yes so biopower is as a type of knowledge of discourse and essentially like a sort of discipline of being that can be contrasted to its earlier forward

by 0 power is power over life as opposed to the power that preceded over which is power death the power of the sovereign like a info closed book discipline and punish the very beginning of the book goes to demonstrate that the type of controls that would push own people don’t tell you what to do / say it just tells you what you can’t do and the way it shows you what you can’t do is that it tortures you did that very mercilessly you know the type of the type of powers that you would have is the sort of power of a demonstration of the sovereign over death but what happens is as you have a sort of transition away from the sovereign as being the reason for everything you know it’s like oh well you’ve offended the corpus of the king and things like this you move on towards different disciplinary powers which of course link to things like liberalism and think but also other institutions like clock some months and stuff but the power over life doesn’t tell you what not to do it tells you what to do and how to do it and things to be worried about so like a really good example this is you know something like it gave it a lecture like I knowledge about yourself how do I feel today or the actually let me bring on this one is a sort of example what is it that makes people think that they ought to be happy and the things that make them happy or the questions or the cost of insert happiness I mean I know there’s a psychoanalytic sort of side to that evaluation but we have a whole proliferation a discourse if you will the way that people talk about themselves in terms of you know the way that they give it for instance I received this Joe this question at my job yesterday you know what would be your ideal job right what is meant by this by general people’s what does the job that would make it so you’re happy and felt like you weren’t working which of course in a completely different discourse happiness has nothing to do with what it is that you should be doing right the way that say France is something like the imposition of happiness that you enjoy yourself is something that it would be considered a bio political power over you so that would be an example of how it controls you in a certain sense making yourself happy yeah i just said given the context of our what would you say this sort of speaks the heart Henry what would you say is there how you see the misinterpreting that as a revolutionary product you should have been successful with the power of the fire protocol yeah it’s worth pointing out that hard negri have a sort of evaluation of biopolitics the way that I presented someone except for there is a ton of emphasis on subjectivity in terms of what they call biopolitics they actually almost always refer to as biopolitical production I mean the reason why is I think that they have a fundamentally different understanding of basically power the way that it works from I would say a majority of the people that do or Africa and the reason why is they interpret that the subjectivity that’s generated from bio power or biopolitics is not the file is not the subjectivity that I created it in the lecture that I showed in the lecture where you know you soft in something you get to ask all these questions about yourself instead of mechanisms what it says is that there are resistances to biopolitics in that each one of those resistance creates a new subjectivity so what biopolitics does is by having this multiple resistance creates sort of like unlimited amount of subjectivity right not the ones where you view yourself as you know in the logic of capital or whether or not you’re having machine to buy liberalism but your own do little fancy subjectivity that is not affected by anything but instead of the resistance I particularly think of that interpretation of the way that for cody’s resistances as not being there the reason why is anytime you are engaging in a resistance you’re a never outside of power be in order to be inside the realm of how you have to have so sort of intelligibility about yourself but there is no rule other intelligibility is being created because if you are a new intelligibility your what knowledge therefore power you’re not a resistance you’re just different competing power where I think that the falls flat in any sort of revolutionary sense is the fact that I think that they believe that they’ve generating new subjectivity off this resistance to biopolitics but I don’t think it ever escapes the sort of biopolitical subjectivity created by neoliberalism like just the examples I brought up

about depressions and making yourself is better like human sorts of capital you know you know you need to invest in an education what is this value to you the way you talk about yourself I don’t think people are escaping that the way that they think they are I mean maybe are different sources of power but it’s the way that they talk about the theory power relationship to code resistances and the generation of subjectivity I don’t think that’s there and I think it’s highly depend on their work so I just think it’s wrong yeah I’m trying to take a look how to formulate this question but the way that Foucault writes about power is like not being top down this also makes me think about my but these things are not personally like I said oh right this time it’s complicated even when you write it yesterday it is yes but um so and also we were talking earlier about history section and have we kind of like compose these like tech sounds of desire or some definition or something ones are like mexi’s for power or like points of like points or power comes into play never happy with it but it seems to me like why when i read that it was kind of like a reversal of like other notions of power that i read about before mm-hmm so I’m trying to I kind of want to try to ask you a question about whether that runs parallel to like a like Baudrillard Ian flip from like looking at society from or economics from like a productive this standpoint to like a consumerist one yeah clogging the way first of all it’s hard for me to speak about Rio well because I haven’t read so that means that I can blow on a how there by now so far I am really right over there so in so far is what you’ve described to me I mean there is a sort of way in which the change from classical liberalism to neoliberalism might be a puzzle piece that kind of fits similar to what you’re talking about before of course in classical liberalism it’s all about you know life liberty property and things like this right and this sort of incitement to make sure they’re protected as an individual but when you look at things like production the enterprise and competition that’s the big switch to neoliberal sort of thinking and before you had the examination of mechanisms like which is to say I’m a worker and i trade my labor power and things like this but by assuming that everybody is the sort of hyper humanistic point of view according to economics what it is is it becomes a study of human behavior scientifically parts a lot so it doesn’t study mechanisms the studies you and how to change you right so it asks questions I mean we don’t need to assume a necessarily nefarious nature I mean here what they are is you obviously you know it’s but the thing is we don’t need to assume that necessary to fairies nature I mean a lot of these people that are like von Hayek and stuff like this he received a medal of freedom and like by machine I mean they really think they’re doing you a really good favor when you get to ask questions like well what does this labor mean to me not necessarily care for everyone or favorite the system or what ever you know so when Yuri ship to that direction we really have a shift in emphasis that because we’re losing things to the picture they really become in the forefront of activity but it’s just not personal activities its mechanisms become on steroids or something does that address the question that you were asking or how I Nia on the books and I’ll get back to you I wanted to mention maybe something about different assumptions of power I mean Foucault definitely has a different notion of power like say confira hand on Iran or benjamine or something like this when it comes to the relationship between power and violence somebody once told me that power is never violence and that is not true like I’m sorry it is not like there are particular points in his literature based on of reading a pen because I see how long yeah I mean well like this is where the distinction kind of comes right the notion is that you know do not really x or exercising knowledge on somebody when you’re beating the crap out of them or incarcerate them or something like this but of course nobody knows the truth of something more than you know like safest strip of police power than when you’re having the crappy

you know it’s so part of power is not barely knowledge but it’s also discipline is the other gets the other side of it so you know and especially the case before biopower where the power over you is the power over death right you know that that can only be exercised in a form of violence over you right it’s never telling you what to do is just telling you not what to do it and we’ll tell you when you step that balance so there’s that they don’t know all right guys let’s get out of there