About Biopolitics

I appreciate the question for talking about biopolitics. I will try to be clear, because I think is a meaningfull matter in the anew global scenario.

The core is that communities, states, firms along history struggle to have some kind of control over
people activities. Taxation, worksheets, strict worktime control, taylorism are one side of the manifestation of power over the movements, the actions, the thinkings of people: of his 'subjectivity'.
Quantification, economical statistic, and at least money, are a try to measure the subjectivity.
This try has obviously failed because of not-rational process developed by capital market and capitalism, and because emotions and relations survive, over all. Capital thorough business, and lately finance, struggle to collect workers' time surplus to control subjectivity. Subjectivity is relations, human social economical, ideas exchanges, creativity, and, in the Information era, kno

Cold Rolling--i'm glad you have posted. however, i assume that English is not your first language. if not, you might want to try Google translate to see if your ideas might come out more coherant in translation. Your subject is quite heady and in it's current form is difficult to follow.

A good place of beginning is to define terms. Two in particular are "object" and "subject". As a frame of reference, tell us what these mean to you. This generally pertains to the treatment of persons in a system. Do we treat persons as objects or subjects and how are these different from one another and how does that treatment effect the system?

You're either way above my head or way below. Either way I have no idea what you actually mean.

<!-Quote-!>Quote:

Quantification, economical statistic, and at least money, are a try to measure the subjectivity.<!-/Quote-!>

Let's see if I can unravel this...


Quantifaction: to express in quantitative terms, or as a numerical equivalent


Economical statistic: not wasting money, time, fuel, etc.; thrifty... & A numerical datum.

THESE ARE AN ATTEMPT TO...

Subjectivity: determined by and emphasizing the ideas, thoughts, feelings, etc. of the artist or writer, not just rigidly transcribing or reflecting reality.


Okay, I get it... a rough way to say it though.

*QUOTE* "You're either way above my head or way below."

LOL, I like that response! Too funny!

Michael Foucault in his book Power/Knowledge discusses the relationship between power and knowledge. As society has become more complex Knowledge is trumping the influence of brute force and even money. We are increasingly faced with the power of “the tyranny of the expert�. Two examples of this are attorney’s and educators. Who determines what the systems in our lives will look like, who will interpret those systems, and who will run them? Attorney’s. Look at the current healthcare bill which was largely crafted by attorney’s with the help of other attorneys and persons with an ax to grind. Over 2000pages of stuff that only an attorney can decipher.
And then there’s educators. From bottom to top in the education system, “expert� educators dictate what will be taught, how it will be taught and what the outcomes should be. Where did we get the idea t

The answer--play a different game.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jReNeEHH2lQ

We have the knowledge, therefore we have the power. Your ideas and perceptions don't matter.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YoIJPwfsbqg

So many words.... makes .. BC... ANGRRRYYY!!!

BC- it's called navel gazing or mental masturbation, but it feels so good.

That's a killer flick! I'm going to have to get a copy of One Flew...

Hey Parsifal, have you ever heard of Jonh Perkins? He lends another persective to this.

biopower is the attempt to control whatever enter or exit the body, or the way the body appear. Food or sounds, clothes or body appearence.

biopolitics is the struggle of multitude to avoid this control developing by himself. creating by himself what to consume. producing and exchanging on markets without a centralized system of laws.

I am sorry for my English, it's not a case that anglosaxon countries produced individualistic way of thinking. But the discussion started with a trend about ancient Greek states, that were the first to apply decentralized organizations. Made very simply, biopolotics look for a concious system of 'polis' organized on information networks. With the scale permitted by modern medias: the 'commonwealth'.

The matter is if people can handle a system of rights not based on punishment by centralized state organizations. The GB system of justice is an example of decentralized rights syst

SG- yes, i've seen several blurbs by Perkins. Over time i've come to agree with him in a lot of ways. i still have problems with his conspiracy theories and the "threats" to him for writing his book. but a lot of people will read it simple for that. on the other side of his and others arguments about the draconian IMF policies, you have to ask yourself, that if you're a lender would you be willing to allow a borrower to continue to spend, spend, spend in the same old ways. I know, we in the US have been doing the same thing and at some point we'll pay the price like Jamaca and other underdeveloped countries. and in the case of underdeveloped countries, those in power will still get their cut. sad

Spend, spend, spend! Absolutley! The leaders are bribed not to repay the loans. The more unpaid debt I get to collect on the more natural resources I can get for my corps for FREE!

Muwahahahahahahahaha Hahahahah!

Yeah, spend, spend, spend, as long as it's borrowed money from me that they will never repay so that upon default I can rape their worthless breeder/feeder citizens and natural resources.

From CR--"The matter is if people can handle a system of rights not based on punishment by centralized state organizations. The GB system of justice is an example of decentralized rights system."

Foucault was somewhat pessimisstic towards this idea. Power and power transfer continues to be the prime mover of societies. But those with more power, wealth, etc. can exert more power than the marginalized and may only dole out scraps from the table. It's difficult to escape the dialectic between labor and capital.

Information technology, the internet etc. open new possibilities and realities but have a tremendous downside in that things have speeded up so much that we do not take time to stop and smell the roses and enter meaningful relationships. Texting and twittering may take up time and simulate a sense of power, but it's an illusion and only passes time. We all are becoming digitized, disaggregated and more isolated

I disagree because of three words: intellectual property rights.

MENTAL MASTURE BATION!!! MASTERBATION!!

AHHH HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!

--- Parsifal The idea that the world works in a dialectical way is not true anymore, because of the spread of communications. They works completely different from the industrial chains of production. Example: the cost of industrial materials tend to grow costantly because of shortage and so on, the cost of telecommunications tend to get lower costantly. The industrials are keeping a pace not affordable anymore by economic systems, they will be set apart (very slowly because of capital maybe) by more value added sectors. In many countries they are supported by state funding and they are not competitive anymore. Economy is not mathematics: capital markets pushing on finance avoid competition, making people taxation to pay for unefficiency. New way of power production could do better also.

---Scarlet System of rights are the effect of biopower. Biopower take the civil system and turn it into protection of monopoly positions, trying to c

CR--what you describe is Brave New World. Those with the power of capital, political and intellectual power determine what those at the bottom will receive 'public money' and will tell us what we can use it for in exchange. (food stamps-can't buy soda pop, cigs, or beer).

i would also suggest you ask the 17% of Americans who are unemployed whether the dialectic between labor and capital is dead, as well as what the effect of public policy has on their lives. Your system replaces one oligarchy with another. No thanks.

Scarlet makes an important point about intellectual property rights. These encourage innovation and as in the case of Henry Ford innovation and higher wages made it affordable for the common man to purchase a car. Who will innovate with GPL's?

To me the challenge of biopolitics, as i understand Foucault and others, is to call upon the system to open a place for as many voices in the system

Cold Rolling, the production of ideas occurs in much the same way the production of products. An idea is sold in the same way a product or service. There can be a shortage of ideas in much the same way as there is a shortage of products or services. The creation of an idea is innovation, but will people create ideas for free?

Innovation carries a price: a tangible price in time, effort, and money. If the commonwealth is to claim ownership over ideas, they do not do proper respect for the creators of ideas. When you think of Windows, you think of Bill Gates. When you think of Apple, you think of Steve Jobbs. When you think of Linux, you think of who? Perhaps there is some truth in these thoughts. Look at the prevalence of each.

If you consider two strands of innovation in the automobile industry, you can see the larger effect of profit-oriented innovation. Compare the Tata Nano and the Toyota Prius. The first gets 54 mpg and costs $2500. Th

good analysis Scarlet. To go a step further, Gates when he was starting the Microsoft empire, most software was in the common domain. everyone would steal/copy others work. But those who were doing software were a very small group. my guess is it would have remained that way if Gates hadn't said and backed up his threats by saying, "if you copy this copywritten program, you're going to be sued and will go to jail". It was a new world.

As near as I can tell, this fails to properly identify the causes of information and the purpose of property. It is a mistake to regard wealth as simply material.
What is wealth? Anything with value.
What has value? That is up to each individual to decide.
What is a market? A place or system in which items of value are traded for items of value.
How is value determined? That is ultimately between to the buyer and seller.

Your "subjectivity" is not an example of the failures of capitalism to quantify emotions or relationships. First, such things carry immense value... the only reason they exist outside the capitalist system is that they cannot be traded. This is the reason they cannot carry monetary value. Second, the capitalist system is not an attempt to quantify and control anyone. It exists to allow for the voluntary exchange of items of value among persons. It exists to protect a person's right to own items of value.

Thanks for all your hints

Scarlet -- It's not utopia of a Brave New World, because new electrical power production techniques can make each individual or family or neighbourhood to produce and exchange through power networks. The same for informations. The problem is that u cannot find primary needs satisfaction outside the capital markets.

Public money make possible to have primary goods, food water house, by chain of exchanges between producers. Organizing a net of suppliers and consumers of goods through public offers. A clearing house has the task to make contacts between demand and supply. Goods travels without a nominal value sticked on them, but just because of their value of use. There are a lot of places where people has part of his salary paid by 'consume checks': u can decide if receive part of the amount in shape of consume bonuses, you go to the mall and by the check u get one kilo of bread, the bakery will use i

I am a social liberal and a fiscal conservative. What you describe is welfareism at its worst. Whether charity or welfare there is a tendency to infantalize persons and keep them in poverty. They do not provide a way to get out of poverty. Even "Christian charity" has a tendency of only placating the givers feelings of entitlement at the expense of the recipient. As givers we can retreat into our gated communities with a feeling of having done good. The US welfare act in 1963 did more to destroy the incentives of persons to get out of poverty, to get an education and meaningful work and it helped destroy the already fragile black family unit. As of 2006, there were over 4.25million Americans on either parole,probation, or in prision. But they have their three hots and a cot, but when they get out, most will still not have an education or the values to make a radical lifestyle change. So, over 60% of those in prison will return to prison wit

thanks Parsifal. Unfortunately by now my connection doesnt permit to watch videos but I will whenever possible.

I'm trying to keep the discussion on general terms, because of the crossborders approach the concept of moltitude needs.

moltitude is not family nor welfare. The problem of integration I think is due to the exclusion some people suffer from relations networks, and mainly because of ignorance. Evidently marginalized people you were talking about aims confusingly to opulence instead of wellness; and that's strictly a philosophical problem. Biopower denies the usefulness of philosophy except when it can spoil it.


Many examples of networks in south america demonstrated that organizing producing communities through information networks is possible. Exchange can be regulated by transactions of purchasing power between producers of goods, determined by consumption, not by detaining goods. The main problem to solv

My dictionary does not have the word "molitude". What is that?

You mention South American examples of organizing producing communities through information networks. Please give me examples/case studies on this. Google references would be helpful.