scholarly journals In and around life: biopolitics in the tropics

2013 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 13-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro Paulo Gomes Pereira

This article is a reflection on the concepts of biopower and biopolitics. Mapping some of the main approaches to this topic, the paper highlights a tension between policies that seek to encourage and potentialize life and individuals excluded and left to die. The article involves two main concerns: one that questions the existence of biopolitical frameworks that end up producing bodies and subjectivities as mere fruits of the exercise of power and control, and, thus, are circumscribed by them; and another that questions how to read this scenario in the tropics. While contemplating these concerns, the text then reflects on the possible limits and potentialities of this conceptual framework.

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-326
Author(s):  
Kristin Engh Førde ◽  
Arnfinn J. Andersen

AbstractI denne artikkelen undersøkes bekymringssamtalen, som ofte blir omtalt som et sentralt verktøy i norske myndigheters arbeid med å forebygge radikalisering og voldelig ekstremisme. Slike samtaler blir gjennomført med personer som er antatt å være i risiko for radikalisering. Hensikten er å innhente informasjon, korrigere atferd, identifisere behov for hjelp, samt å tilby hjelp dersom det trengs. Inspirert av Foucault og hans tenkning om pastoralmakt analyserer vi bekymringssamtalen som myndighetsutøvelse, der til dels motstridende agendaer – av statlig kontroll og statlig omsorg – kommer sammen i det som konseptualiseres som «bekymring». Videre argumenterer vi for at bekymringssamtalen eksemplifiserer og synliggjør mer overordnede dilemmaer og konflikter i myndighetenes forebyggingsinnsats på dette feltet, hvor bekymring gir mening og legitimitet til det vi ser som en problematisk sammenstilling av omsorgs- og kontrolltiltak og av sosialpolitiske og sikkerhetspolitiske agendaer.AbstractIn this article we set our sights on what is often referred to as a key instrument for countering violent extremism in Norway, the conversation of concern [Bekymringssamtale in Norwegian], usually referred to in English as the police conversation intervention. The conversation is conducted with individuals assumed to be at risk of radicalisation with the aim of obtaining information, modifying behaviour, identifying any needs for help, and offering help if needed. We argue that this intervention clearly demonstrates certain dilemmas and conflicts inherent in the Norwegian Government’s recent policies on counter-extremism, where the concept of «concern» [bekymring] encompasses control and care, and includes agendas related to security and welfare, respectively. Applying a Foucauldian conceptual framework, we analyse the conversation of concern as a technique of pastoral power in which conflicting agendas interact in problematic ways, and the exercising of state power and control is neutralised through a notion of a general common good; «concern».


2005 ◽  
pp. 29-30
Author(s):  
Naveen Sharma ◽  
William Stanley

Author(s):  
Phillip Drew

The years since the beginning of the twenty-first century have seen a significant incursion of international human rights law into the domain that had previously been the within the exclusive purview of international humanitarian law. The expansion of extraterritorial jurisdiction, particularly by the European Court of Human Rights, means that for many states, the exercise of physical power and control over an individual outside their territory may engage the jurisdiction of human rights obligations. Understanding the expansive tendencies of certain human rights tribunals, and the apparent disdain they have for any ambiguity respecting human rights, it is offered that the uncertain nature of the law surrounding humanitarian relief during blockades could leave blockading forces vulnerable to legal challenge under human rights legislation, particularly in cases in which starvation occurs as a result of a blockade.


2021 ◽  
pp. 0142064X2110248
Author(s):  
Kyung Min Kim

In 2 Cor. 10–13, Paul tries to prove his authority as a reliable leader by using two different masculinity standards. Paul manifests his power and control over the Corinthian church members by using an image of paterfamilias (11.2-3; 12.14). Paternal control of others was an essential element of hegemonic masculinity in the Greco-Roman world. Moreover, Paul proves his manliness by revealing his endurance and submission to divine authority (11.21b–12.10) according to the Hellenistic Jewish masculinity. I argue that Paul is embedded in these different cultural assumptions regarding masculinity and that he refers to these assumptions to persuade Gentile and Jewish groups in the Corinthian church.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document