Suchergebnisse

The technocratic dimension of government—its reliance upon knowledge claims, usually in scientific guise—is of great importance if we wish to understand modern power and governance. In Power Without Knowledge: A Critique of Technocracy, Jeffrey Friedman investigates the often-overlooked question of the relationship between technocratic knowledge/power and ideas. Friedman's contribution to our understanding of technocracy can therefore be read as a contribution to governmentality studies, one that introduces the possibility of adding normative solutions to this critical tradition.

Today, the environment is everywhere. For less than ten years, it goes without saying that all individuals, the population and the State are obliged to minimize their impact on the environment, even if they would not be affected themselves by potential consequences. For almost every action, concern for its environmental impact is present. That obligation manifests itself in a myriad of ways that affect individual behavior - what Foucault identifies as power. This paper seeks to understand how, through which forms and technologies, we are subject to power in the name of climate protection in Germany. Or, if turned on its head, it analyses how the climate is governed in Germany. ; 3

"Using Michel Foucault's idea of governmentality, this book reinterprets various cases of revolt and popular uprisings in Bangladesh. It attempts to synthesize the theories of Foucault's governmentality and Antonio Gramsci's notions of hegemony and counter-hegemony. Bangladesh's history of revolt and counter-hegemony are categorized as nationalist governmentality, authoritarian governmentality, and global/neo-liberal governmentality. Each of these phases, the author argues, is not a replacement or dislocation of the earlier governmentality in practice but rather a reformulation of the construct. This reconfiguration results from counter-hegemonic revolts launched by various subaltern categories. Throughout the book, the author asserts that governmentality and counter-conducts/counter-hegemonies are linked with and transformed by each other. Furthermore, by using Bangladesh as a case study, the author contemplates an idea of colonial and post-colonial governmentality"--

"By using Michel Foucault's idea of governmentality, this book reinterprets various cases of revolt and popular uprisings in Bangladesh. It attempts to synthesize the theories of Foucault's governmentality and Antonio Gramsci's notions of hegemony and counter-hegemony. In this book, Bangladesh's history of revolt and counter-hegemony are categorized as nationalist governmentality, authoritarian governmentality, and global/neo-liberal governmentality. Each of these phases, the author argues, is not a replacement or dislocation of the earlier governmentality in practice but rather a reformulation of the construct. This reconfiguration results from counter-hegemonic revolts launched by various subaltern categories. Throughout the book, the author asserts that governmentality and counter-conducts/counter-hegemonies are linked with and transformed by each other. Furthermore, by using Bangladesh as a case study, the author contemplates an idea of colonial and post-colonial governmentality"--

Governmentality, Biopower, and Everyday Life synthesizes and extends the disparate strands of scholarship on Foucault's notions of governmentality and biopower and grounds them in familiar social contexts including the family, the workplace, and the military.

Abstract
In the manufactured politics of crisis that we see increasingly in many societies around the world, the question of what politics can overcome the impasse of so-called democratic rule, which serves as a cover for the domination of liberal oligarchies, has become urgent. Mining the most radical elements in Foucault's thinking about governmentality, this essay seeks to imagine a politics of left governmentality that would evade the pitfalls of left populism.

Global Governmentality extends Foucault's political thought towards international studies, exploring the governance of the global, the international, the regional and many other extra-domestic spaces.

Marine spatial planning (MSP) is advanced by its champions as an impartial and rational process that can address complex management issues. We argue that MSP is not innately rational and that it problematises marine issues in specific ways, often reflecting hegemonic agendas. The illusion of impartial rationality in MSP is derived from governmentalities that appear progressive but serve elite interests. By understanding the creation of governmentalities, we can design more equitable planning processes. We conceptualise governmentalities as consisting of problematisations, rationalities and governance technologies, and assess England's first marine plans to understand how specific governmentalities de-radicalise MSP. We find that progressive framings of MSP outcomes, such as enhanced well-being, are deployed by the government to garner early support for MSP. These elements, however, become regressively problematised in later planning phases, where they are framed by the government as being difficult to achieve and are pushed into future iterations of the process. Eviscerating progressive elements from the planning process clears the way for the government to focus on implementing a neoliberal form of MSP. Efforts to foster radical MSP must pay attention to the emergence of governmentalities, how they travel through time/space and be cognisant of where difference can be inserted into planning processes. Achieving progressive MSP will require the creation of a political frontier early in the process, which cannot be passed until pathways for progressive socio-environmental outcomes have been established; advocacy for disenfranchised groups; broadening MSP evaluations to account for unintended impacts; and the monitoring of progressive objectives.