From: Mark Kelly <mgekelly@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 23 Apr 2005 13:16:05 +1000
I have thought long and hard about these issues.
The first thing is to note is that the US does not "permit the use of
guns within civil society", which would clearly be contrary to
biopolitics - rather, it permits their possession, and use outside of
civil society, in hunting, target shooting, and use against criminals
in limited circumstances. Gun use is still strongly regulated with a
view to protecting the population.
The second thing is that the 'gun-control' tendency is clearly more
biopolitical than the 'right to bear arms' tendency. It should be
noted that the right to bear arms as enshrined in the Bill of Rights
is clearly pre-biopolitical and represents a mode of existence in
colonial America that was simply not biopolitical, in which weapons
were a necessity, in which government was despotic and not
biopolitical. It has been noted that, due to the ancientness of its
constitution, America is actually quite pre-modern.
On 4/22/05, can batukan <batukan78@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Debate question for all interested:
> Why does the US permit the use of guns within the civil society if "human
> life" is the most precious thing for the regime of "bio-power"? Is it a
> matter of liberty or a strategic component of the power mechanism?
> Can Batukan
> Dept. of philosophy,
> Univ. of Galatasaray, Istanbul
> Foucault-L mailing list