Hello list members,
I was wondering if anyone could offer any advice or references with regards to the tensions between the domains/realms of government to which Foucault referred in his later governmental work. I am particularly interested in the way in which ?biopolitical? and ?economic? rationalities may have come into conflict. Colin Gordon mentioned such tensions in his introduction to the Foucault Effect, namely, the effects on the urban environment and working classes of un-regulated laissz faire economics. Mitchell Dean has also commented on the tensions between rationalities that may reasonably be said to coexist within a regime of liberal governmentality.
To set some context, I am interpreting the private writings a low(ish)-level administrator in colonial India, who was put in charge of urban improvement in the 1930s. His views were incredibly ambivalent towards the central government, but this was not just the colonial, and psychological, ambivalence of Homi Bhabha. Rather, this was a commitment to the colonial ideas of Progress and Improvement, but a growing distaste for imperial financial restrictions. As such, a tension became apparent between the colonial economic model of non-intervention and maximum profit and the emerging European model of welfare in which the lives of the ?native? population should have been cared for. This tension was also, of course, in evidence in European cities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, but I suspect it was starker and longer lasting in the colonial context.
Any advice greatly appreciated!
Many thanks
Steve
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr Stephen Legg
Department of Geography
University of Cambridge
Downing Place
Cambridge
CB2 3EN
www.geog.cam.ac.uk/people/legg/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I was wondering if anyone could offer any advice or references with regards to the tensions between the domains/realms of government to which Foucault referred in his later governmental work. I am particularly interested in the way in which ?biopolitical? and ?economic? rationalities may have come into conflict. Colin Gordon mentioned such tensions in his introduction to the Foucault Effect, namely, the effects on the urban environment and working classes of un-regulated laissz faire economics. Mitchell Dean has also commented on the tensions between rationalities that may reasonably be said to coexist within a regime of liberal governmentality.
To set some context, I am interpreting the private writings a low(ish)-level administrator in colonial India, who was put in charge of urban improvement in the 1930s. His views were incredibly ambivalent towards the central government, but this was not just the colonial, and psychological, ambivalence of Homi Bhabha. Rather, this was a commitment to the colonial ideas of Progress and Improvement, but a growing distaste for imperial financial restrictions. As such, a tension became apparent between the colonial economic model of non-intervention and maximum profit and the emerging European model of welfare in which the lives of the ?native? population should have been cared for. This tension was also, of course, in evidence in European cities throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, but I suspect it was starker and longer lasting in the colonial context.
Any advice greatly appreciated!
Many thanks
Steve
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dr Stephen Legg
Department of Geography
University of Cambridge
Downing Place
Cambridge
CB2 3EN
www.geog.cam.ac.uk/people/legg/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~