The dynamic of power according to Foucault

Michel Foucault was a philosopher who followed the concepts of postmodernism. Among other philosophers who defined the theory of power, Foucault was one of the pioneers. From the idea that power is used to direct other people’s course of action, the Foucault Foundation turned the dynamic of power towards the belief that it is everywhere. In other words, rather than dominating, power is constructed with knowledge, acceptance and truth. More specifically, the possession of power is not in the hand of the operator; rather, it is in the hand of operative elements. Every society on this planet has its outlook towards truth, and according to that outlook, the power practices gets constructed (Deleuze). However, there is always an uncertainty that the power can become a negative force; but Foucault changed this perception that power is not always the force that manipulates people on performing things against their consent, rather for the overall development of the society, it is essential.

While discussing the role of the state vis-à-vis the subject of power, it can be said that power possession is a subjective topic; therefore, it can frequently change (Social Power: Definition & Concept). Usually, the state possesses power on several divisions essential to long-term growth in any society. The operational dynamic of any state’s power does not always get performed directly, but sometimes it follows an indirect approach as suggested by Foucault, according to which political and socio-economic power of the states have much more significance in the development scenario.

It is often argued that understanding the concept of power is important to understand political philosophy in a better light. However, the Anglo-American perspective of political philosophy had failed to consider the importance of power; rather, it focused heavily on the obligatory measures taken by different governments to fulfil their duty to their citizens. Following this up comes the classical theory of Sovereignty. According to this theory, every state existing in the face of the earth is considered a completely political community and performs as the bridge between the monarch or highest authority of power and the citizens (Giddens and Held). Foucault criticized this perception that if Sovereignty is lent the highest power, then the power practice in a society will not have a proper analytical dynamic. He exclaimed that law possesses the ultimate power and is the Sovereignty representative. Thus, disobeying the law is equivalent to disobeying Sovereignty, and one who does this must be punished. The question is always of “right to take life or let live”.

Foucault’s critique of Sovereignty

Similarly, in the context of disciplinary power, Foucault argued that disciplinary mechanisms and training modules are better options to educate and rectify people on their behavioural attributes; rather than the old school violent and dominant methods of controlling other people.

Voluntary consent means the citizens of a domestic region giving their permission to their governments to perform their operational activities related to power. It is any government’s moral responsibility to take into consideration the consents of their people while imposing legal and political measures. Suppose the people do not agree voluntarily to any regulation, and there is an existence of dominance and force. In that case, it is not morally correct for the governments to impose the same anyway. Therefore, it can be seen that power is a significant attribute of voluntary consent as the operational dynamics of the state and government is related mostly to the power of the same.

As mentioned above, consent is giving permission to an act that ensures the consent giver’s authority. This is what Sovereignty is. For any political establishment, among other things, consent is the fundamental driving force. If consent is getting valued, naturally, Sovereignty also needs to get valued. Just like this, disciplinary power, as mentioned above, means adopting measures related to discipline and training to educate people. Therefore, while connecting disciplinary power and voluntary consents, it can be said that these measures that a state considers must align with the people’s consent.

The term Post-Structuralism means building theories rejecting the concept of structuralism which states that different attributes of different cultures need to be analyzed depending on the mutual relationship between human beings on the concepts of thinking, perspective and feelings. According to Foucault and Deleuze, the human knowledge of the earth is determined through signs. As time passes, these signs also tend to change, resulting in a new perspective. Thus, each one of these perceptions defines the world differently. Hence, post-structuralism is directly connected to rationalism as it is considered that people think rationally, and the signs depend on this rationality. However, post-structuralism contradicted the concept of structuralism on the attribute of language. Language is a subjective matter, and it cannot be analyzed in an absolute manner.

Marxism and post-structuralism are both contradicting concepts. Marxism believed in economic determinants, technology and totality concepts, whereas, according to them, poststructuralists disregarded their history, and the attributes of politics were replaced by language dimensions.

The role of voluntary consent in power dynamics

When during 1948, the concept of human rights was first declared universally, its significance had a huge impact on society. All other morality concepts became dull in front of the human rights concept. In describing human rights, Foucault stood on neutral ground; he neither agreed nor disagreed with it. The human rights debate divides the world into two parts, namely heavenly spaces and hellish spaces. The western part of the world falls under the heavenly space, and the eastern parts, specifically third-world countries, fall under the hellish space. Therefore, the concept of neo-colonialism aligns with human rights, where the developed countries need to educate the underdeveloped ones to better them. Foucault argued that the human rights dynamics missed out on the main attribute of power, which is discipline. Moreover, every human on the face of the earth have certain power possession, and if they are not being satisfied by a government, then claims can be raised; after all, human rights is not a concept that some people do have, and others do not. Rather, it is a course of action that alters the perception of observing the world.

Radical feminism is a social concept that developed based on the dominance of patriarchy. According to this branch of feminism patriarchal concept is the driving force of division between men and women (Hooks). Therefore, this theory objects to this concept of gender diversification adopted by the existing politics and social regimes; rather, it concentrates on the alterations related to culture that demolishes patriarchy and establishes hierarchy. The term radical is associated with the roots as this theory of feminism tends to focus on the roots of extracting patriarchy. World-known female activists Andrea Dworkin, Catherine MacKinnon, Valarie Solanas and Alice Walker, had discussed in many of their works that when patriarchy persists in any society, men possess more power than women, and it sometimes becomes a threat to their human rights of them

Liberal feminism is the brand known as “mainstream feminism” that concentrates mainly on gender equality for every woman residing in society. According to this segment of feminism, equality can be attained through political measures taken under the wing of a liberal structure of democracy. This brand first emerged during the 19^th century, focusing on the social phenomena that restricted women from attaining education. Later differences in regulation regarding law, policies, education and profession were the main discussed topic under this feminist wing. More specifically, liberal feminism was concentrated on the issues like equal rights for both men and women in education and corporate establishments, which equal accessibility to education facilities, similar pay-scale, no segregation based on gender specificity and equal dignity ensuring for both the genders. Moreover along with it, liberal feminists considered that marriage is an equal companionship rather than a dominance of the men on their spouses. Along with it, reducing domestic violence and sexual harassment issues were also addressed in this branch of feminism. Some of the famous feminists of liberalism were Stuart Mill, Helen Taylor, Elizabeth Cady Stanton and others who came forward by discussing the issues mentioned above.

Post-structuralism and the significance of language

The theory of radical feminism identified that the root cause of inequality and oppression of women was the patriarchy. More specifically, the international societies were considered as a patriarchal unit where men get the liberty to oppress women. This practice has been continued since the human species emerged on the face of the earth. As patriarchy had the highest status in society, women were practically considered as the outsiders, namely the “others”. In reality, patriarchy does not entail that men get additional benefits by oppressing women; rather, patriarchy entails men’s dominance and exploitation by men on women. It is a power play of gender control. Therefore, radical feminists raised their voices based on these issues of oppression, and their main goal was to abolish patriarchy. One example can be provided for the same. There was a belief in older times; even in present times, some orthodox parts of the world function with this belief that men ought to go outside the home for work and women are supposed to stay back home and look for kids. What is more that, they will not get any co-operation from their husbands in household chores and looking after the kids. In a way, women were treated as an unpaid house help.

Although there are a lot of philosophical pioneers who have worked towards creating a society where gender equality persists, in democratic nations, this concept is still elusive. As mentioned above, equality based on gender specifications means mutual respect between men and women and equal social position of the same. The reason for the elusiveness is because the people residing in democratic societies still believe that women are supposed to be oppressed, and they typically belong in the kitchen. This outlook is possessed by many third-world democracies where women are either treated as fragile or as objects. Therefore, no matter how much the policies and social structure develop, if people’s outlook does not get altered, then despite perfectly constructed measures, there will be elusions and gaps in achieving an equal constitution of society.

Queer theory is a political attribute plan along with being a theoretical concept. First introduced in the last decade of the 20^th century, this theory dealt with the study of homosexual people (Sullivan). The main argument of Queer theory is vast, and there is no absolute meaning to it; however, it primarily focused on the notion that the outlook of considering only heterosexuality as normal has several shortcomings. There can be other sexual orientations than the heterosexual branch, and therefore, those also need acceptance in society.

Foucault’s perspective on human rights

Gender essentialization is perception according to which humans of this planet are divided into two primary gender men and women. This was the ancient belief that God was the supreme creator of this planet, and he only created two gender specifications. In accordance with these gender specifications, humans were expected to behave in every society. These expectations are the main reason for the building up of inequalities. Queer theory challenged this idea and instead portrayed the gender concept with flexibility. To be more precise, how a gendered act becomes who the gender’s self is. Therefore, the concept of masculinity and femininity is pretty much subjective and floating (Pinar). It is the action that gives identity to oneself, and the traits of gender specification get justifiably distributed.

While addressing the concept of gender’s social construction, a clear dividing line must be drawn between the terms ‘sex’ and ‘gender’. Sex is an anatomical concept where the physical attributes of men and women are different. However, the concept of gender is completely related to psychological, social and cultural attributes. That is why it is said that gender gets constructed depending on what a society’s perception is about its socio-cultural and psychological dynamics. The trait of masculinity and femininity that is why determinable through the social constructs, and every human being has the liberty to choose what role they want to play. From this definition, these roles are not fixed, but fluid and how to act on gender specificities completely depends on the individual. How society sees a person comprises certain determinants like the individual’s perception based on the social constraints, the choice of the individual, age and finally, maturity. All these determinants can change from time to time, resulting in the flexibility of an individual’s social identity.

According to the queer theory, the criticism is not against heterosexuality; rather, it is against the accepted normal by society. Queer aims to analyze social, political and cultural establishments to understand power and domination. In the recent past, violent activities have been commenced worldwide on the people belonging from the LGBT communities. This hostility is a violation of human rights as LGBT rights are also under the wing of human rights. By ignoring the same, social justice can never be achievable.

The queer society, policy and law entail the expansion of the human rights theory to recognize and accept non-heterosexual orientations. According to this theory, legal, social and cultural practices are working effortlessly towards reducing homophobia and hostility based on sexual diversifications. Moreover, sexual experiences are completely private; therefore, to avoid the violation of the same, those need to be protected.

In today’s world, heterosexuality works as a dominant attribute of the social structure. Therefore, in order to maintain harmony, recognizing people from the different sexually oriented communities are important. Despite all the hostility and rigidity, day by day, societies have started to recognize the LGBT communities and the idea that heterosexuality is not the ultimate normal.

References

Deleuze, Gilles. “Postscript on the societies of control. October, 59.” (1992): 3.

Giddens, Anthony, and David Held, eds. Classes, power and conflict: classical and contemporary debates. Univ of California Press, 1982.

Sullivan, Nikki. A critical introduction to queer theory. NYU Press, 2003.

Hooks, Bell. Feminist theory: From margin to center. Pluto Press, 2000.

Pinar, William F. “Queer theory in education.” Journal of homosexuality 45.2-4 (2003): 357-360.

Social Power: Definition & Concept.” Study.com, 14 December 2016, study.com/academy/lesson/social-power-definition-lesson-quiz.html