Э. Сеяма


In this article author analyses the biopolitics phenomenon. According the author oof the article, biopolitics is considered to be a philosophically critical interpretation of the neoliberalism, while the state is a tool of state supremacy in the era of the classical liberalism. The author places on record the approaching of the anti-capitalism together with the recognition of the necessity to protect certain domain of the state territory throughout the period when despotism under the capital breaks state territory which guarantees certain right of the nation. The ideal of the neoliberalism consists in consistent observations and interference in international market. Biopolitics is a supremacy system in the modern society where the state government forces to obey within the law regime. Herewith the people subordinate self-willed and biopolitics means some kind of self-discipline. Discipline is a stance where the Absolute is being absent while through the discipline and exercise such a heteronomy is being implemented in the body of each person so that he controls himself. In this case autonomy appears which is an internalized heteronomy. The autonomy caused by the discipline is only the autonomy qua an internalized heteronomy which includes regularities as well. The author of this article appeals to Foucault in his attempt to explain the contradictions of the neoliberalism. Foucault by himself used the experience of Ancient Greece and Rome and tried to find there a motive of self-nurturing and aesthetics of existence and simultaneously connected Greece and Rome with modern day America. He came to a conclusion that people already live in a political world qua a quasi-animal one. G. Agamben in his turn looks for the ways of counteraction against biopolitics. Pointing at the fact that it is impossible for power, which intends to control everyone, to exist one can play the role of the resistance to bio-power. In this article conclusion is being drawn according to which the term “subject” by a later Foucault which does not serve as a structured only by a function of Hegel dialectics of “master and slave” which is being held by the disciplinary exercise, by the supremacy and subordination of the common value and is not structured only by the function of the subjectification with purpose to influence on the self.


biopolitics; discipline; internalized heteronomy; autonomy; subjectification


  • There are currently no refbacks.