Catalogue Search | MBRL
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
{{itemTitle}}
38
result(s) for
"Hoffman, Marcelo"
Sort by:
Foucault and power : the influence of political engagement on theories of power
\"Michel Foucault is one of the most preeminent theorists of power, yet the relationship between his militant activities and his analysis of power remains unclear. The book explores this relationship to explain the development of Foucault's thinking about power. Using newly translated and unpublished materials, it examines what led Foucault to take on the question of power in the early 1970s and subsequently refine his thinking, working through different models (war and government) and modalities (sovereign, disciplinary, biopolitical, pastoral and governmental). Looking at Foucault's political trajectory, from his involvement with the prisoner support movement and Solidarity to his controversial engagement with the Iranian revolution, the book shows the militant underpinning of his interest in the question of power and its various shifts and mutations. This thorough account, which includes the first translation of a report edited by Foucault on prison conditions, will provide students in contemporary political theory with a better understanding of Foucault's thinking about power and of the interplay between political activities and theoretical productions\"-- Provided by publisher.
BOOK
Sources of Anxiety About the Party in Radical Political Theory
Abstract New protest movements have recently occasioned debates about the party form on the left. Jodi Dean contributes to these debates through her theorisation of the party as an organisation for making the egalitarian impulses of the crowd durable. In this endeavour, Dean acknowledges anxiety about the party form on the left, yet she dilutes its complexity through recourse to generalities and abstractions. This article seeks to reclaim the complexity of anxiety about the party form on the left through the reflections of three major thinkers in radical political theory: Frantz Fanon, Michel Foucault and Alain Badiou. These thinkers suggest that anxiety about the party can spring from highly variegated sources and lend itself to equally variegated positions. These sources and positions capture the complexity of sources of anxiety about the party on the left. They also enable us to take stock of the forms of the betrayal of radical politics by the party.
Journal Article
Disciplinary power
This chapter provides an overview of biopower as Michel Foucault conceives of it. This overview will distinguish biopower from sovereign and disciplinary power, identify and discuss distinctive characteristics of biopower and provide examples which illustrate these characteristics. Hobbes notes in particular that it would be ludicrous for a sovereign to attempt to regulate the corporeal dimensions of a subject's existence, and hence no covenant with the sovereign could be concerned with these aspects of a subject's life. In order to administer life, it is important for the state to obtain forecasts and statistical estimates concerning such demographic factors as fertility, natality, immigration, dwelling and mortality rates. Death was the ultimate expression of the sovereign's power and was made into a public spectacle whenever this power needed to be affirmed. Eugenics attempts to improve the gene pool; however, what is meant by 'improve' is inevitably socioculturally defined and has always been tainted by classism, racism and abilism.
Book Chapter
Foucault and power, 1971–1984
Throughout the early 1970s, Michel Foucault consistently upheld the view that power consists of a warlike struggle between unequal forces, engendering the domination of some forces over others. Around the mid-1970s, Foucault began to question this understanding of power, which he dubbed, variably, the \"model of war\" and \"Nietzsche's hypothesis\". By the late 1970s, Foucault spoke of power in markedly different terms, characterizing the relation at the heart of power less as a warlike clash between forces and more as the guidance, direction and leadership of the behavior of others or, more technically, the \"conduct of conduct\". Foucault identified this latter view of power with his neologism \"governmentality\" as well as the simpler, far more recognizable term \"government'. Using his recently published and translated courses as well as archival sources this dissertation grapples with the problem of why Foucault shifted from a bellicose to a governmental understanding of power. We submit that changes in both his politics and research agenda precipitated this shift. Specifically, we posit that a far more sober political stance towards putatively revolutionary movements coupled with the effort to constitute a \"genealogy of the modern State\" yielded a more governmental understanding of power and that this understanding of power precipitated the appearance of freedom in Foucault's thinking about power in the abstract by the outset of the 1980s.
Dissertation
Ambivalent sovereignty: Inquiries into the dual foundation of political realism's subject
Ambivalent Sovereignty inquires into the subject of political realism. This subject, sovereign authority, appears to have a dual foundation. It appears divided against itself, but how can realism nonetheless observe legitimate modes of sovereignty emerge? Against the liberal idea that a \"synthesis\" of both material-coercive and ideal-persuasive powers should be accomplished, within the world of international relations, realism gives meaning to a structural type of state power that is also constitutionally and legitimately dividing itself—against itself. Machiavelli but particularly also other realists such as Hannah Arendt, Max Weber, and Aristotle are being reinterpreted to demonstrate why each state's ultimate authority may symbiotically emerge from its self-divisions, rather than from one synthetic unity. Whereas liberal theorists, from Montesquieu to John Rawls and Alexander Wendt, err too far in assuming the presence of the state's monistic authority, the realist theorists further advance an answer to how sovereign states may begin to both recognize and include only the most-legitimate manifestations of their common dualist authority. Ambivalent Sovereignty is relevant in this sense as it transcends-and-yet-includes these common dualities: freedom/necessity; emergence/causation; self-organization/power structures.
Dissertation
