Neoliberalism or Biopolitics paper

Leo Li

ENG 106

Professor Kurt-Voss Hoynes

Nov. 18, 2016

Neoliberalism vs. Biopolitics

Under the reign of neoliberalism, the United States seems to have been changed to being anti-democratic than it has ever been witnessed before . Neoliberalism has been introduced to serve as the reference and pillar for all consultation and basis of matter of politics, economic state of the nation, government, rationality and even morally by the article. The article “Beyond the biopolitics of disposability: Rethinking neoliberalism in the new gilded age” seeks to establish the effects brought about by use of biopolitics to realign corporate power though the market forces. Biopolitics has brought more harm than good in the intersection and existence of race and class. New suffering has been experienced with the reigning bio political systems.

Foucault describes biopolitics as a technology of power that has been turned on the citizens, his article discusses the negative aspect of biopolitics revealing the darker side that is less explored by such philosophers. Biopolitics has been used a tool for using rules to control people without the rightful consideration of their views and opinions on various matters. Biopolitics has, indeed, brought a new element in the addressing of issues at the judicial systems and disciplinary techniques in the United States.

The author , however, notes that the understanding of the term is critical. Some have relied on various meanings of biopolitics that have been misleading to their own detriment. One of the results of the biopolitical system is the objectification of human beings. More so the women which has been on lines of discrimination . The thin line has been crossed of viewing people for their worth and who they are and objectification into some sorts of machines has been observed especially in the corporate world.

Biopolitical savage in this manner becomes a tool of savageness rather than a tool for reform and to help enact human rights. Human life process has been mismanaged explains the author and has led to the trampling with the roles of citizens more so that lay man who is not in any leadership role. Their knowledge and skills have been taken advantage of and power has been misused by those in the leadership roles. The author calls out for newer action or the eradication of the biopolitical reigns if it results into chaos rather than prevailing harmony.

The article discusses concepts of biopolitics with a firm standing that examines the biopolitical system in the colonial era and the handling of the matter in the ancient times. The findings are more negatinge with the hopes of shedding light on some measures to correct the contemporary phenomena. Biopolitics brings a border to politics and human life. This is a gray area that should be treated with respect, lest it aggravates and creates chaos in the political system, governance, domestic and legal dimensions of the state. When biopolitics is used as a measure to critique and shed bad light on the government, a lot more harm is caused than good.

The logic of a free market controlling the United States is depicted with enactment of some of some biopolitical concepts. This is such as the declaration of value on some non-economic issues and facets such as human life. This becomes wrong on so many levels and aspects of human existence. My view, coincides with that of the author, that upon hints of human objectification, biopolitics should be dropped at the mention of it. Perceiving of human life in economic terms is inhumane and against human rights.

However, moving away from the negative aspects brought about by the effects of biopolitics a few positive elements are worth noticing. Biopolitics has been used to control the population to avoid instances of overpopulation bringing up measures to control the birth rates. This is a moral issue and to some extent a religious one hence carefully handling by the government being paramount. The rules and regulations put up have to be humane and respect the mere existence of human life rather than view population as a political problem or opportunity.

References

Collier, S. J. (2011). Post-Soviet social: neoliberalism, social modernity, biopolitics. Princeton University Press.

Giroux, H. A. (2008). Beyond the biopolitics of disposability: Rethinking neoliberalism in the new gilded age. Social Identities, 14(5), 587-620.

�Has it been or not?

�Clarify this idea.

�What do you mean by this?

�This is good but you could make the connection between neoliberalism and biopolitics more apparent.

�Where did he come from?

�Whose article? Foucault’s or the article you discuss above. In fact, you should introduce the author’s name somewhere. If it is the article above, you need to turn this second clause into its own sentence.

�Use the name.

�Who?

�This isn’t a complete thought.

�Clarify this sentence.

�Is this missing an article? You need to define this idea.

�Restructure—the idea gets lost.

�Why is this important?

�What do you mean by this?

�How will it do these things?

�Restructure.

�Clarify.

�What you have here has the potential to turn into quite a good paper. However, you need to continue to work on defining the scope of your essay—as it stands, you seem to want to talk about the relationship between biopolitics, neoliberalism, government, the public sphere, and the private sphere. While all of these can be discussed, for a 4–6 -page paper, it is just too much. Indeed, if you choose to discuss all of these things you will probably end up not being able to either fully explore or support your ideas. Nevertheless, this is a good start.