Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Reflections on Ramman and Tutton and Food Subsidies as a form of biopower.
The main thing that strikes me about Ramman and Tutton's "Life, Science and biopower" is how nuanced and complicated the whole issue of bio-power is. It also requires a great deal of philosophy- As Americans we are promised the pursuit of Life, Liberty and Happiness, but what does that mean logistically, since we are also indirectly promised Freedom? Does my right to Life and Happiness supersede another's right to Freedom in the form of forgoing vaccinations? Should the government have the power protect my life by enforcing the biological altering of another?
The authors state some pretty benign examples where the answer is a resounding yes- Food service workers are required to wash their hands and people are not allowed to defecate in public. But there are examples where this goes way too far- government-enforced eugenics was practiced in several fist world countries, including the USA. The problem with this nuanced approach is the public's appetite for extremist dogma. Critical thinking does not win political platforms in certain parts of the country.
One other form of bio-power that wasn't well represented is that of social pressure. For example- the government doesn't enforce that we cough into our arms (or hands), but if one was to sit in a crowded room sneezing and coughing they would be confronted by those sharing the space. This is also highly applicable to parenting. So great is the public and personal pressure on parents (especially mothers) to demonstrate near-perfect decision-making for their children, that they can sometimes be exploited quite easily. (See: the gargantuan volume of parenting books.)
It occurred to me that another, less obvious form of biopower might be food subsidies. Because cost largely governs what the poorest of a society eats, government has some control over that very personal aspect of their lives. (And the government could be a lot more helpful in this aspect) We do not generally recognize cost manipulation as a form of control, though.
Another thing that struck me is info-graphic quality of the biopower, bioethics, and biopolitics hierarchy- Biopower is a large part of bioethics which is a large part of biopolitics. Each of these are the most easily definable and probably most focused part of their successor. They're like tributaries feeding into a big, messy river.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your mention of life liberty and the pursuit of happiness in the first paragraph relates interestingly to your previous post (http://ellekelsheimerbiopolitics.blogspot.com/2013/10/reflections-on-ramman-and-tutton-and.html). American culture is generally more supportive of the *pursuit* of happiness than happiness itself. Scientific advancements are praised enthusiastically, regardless of the degree of happiness they bring to individuals. Maintaining happiness is far less glamorous, especially when it comes to happiness of the poor and lower class. In that case it is often seen as a chore. Throughout our history, America's spirit of westward expansion, as you mentioned in your previous post, has supported this cultural attitude which praises the pursuit of happiness.
ReplyDeleteBoth happiness, and the pursuit of happiness are fundamentally good things. Pursuit of happiness through science, hard work, exploration, etc brings great satisfaction to people in all economic and social situations in America (myself included). This has been especially true in times of economic prosperity and equality, when people had their basic needs met and had a real chance of improving the world through their pursuits. In (today's) times of struggle and inequality, failure to meet the basic needs of the middle-lower class increasingly gets in the way of the satisfaction that can be achieved through the pursuit of happiness. When maintenance of a base level of lively hood is ignored in favor of pursuit of advancement, that pursuit begins to undermine itself.
Personally, I've always found great satisfaction in the pursuit of intellectual advancement. Discovering and creating things which hold value in their beauty, novelty, and utility. I happen to be good at this and economically privileged enough to pursue it. Luckily for me, society enthusiastically supports these aspects of my labors, which directly support the pursuit of happiness.
I think that many creative people (including myself), in addition to being driven by pure beauty, novelty, and utility have a drive to create things which hold value that is based on the happiness they bring to other people. This part of the creative drive, unfortunately, is less strongly supported by American culture. I feel as though I have, and will continue to have to fight to incorporate that part of my drive into my work. The fact that it is so much easier to realize creativity in a way that contributes to advancement than it is to do so in a way that contributes to real, global happiness, is one of the reasons that the work of technologists, and other creatives often goes towards novelty and services for the rich. It is simply a much easier way for one with creative inclination to attain satisfaction. The culture that makes blind pursuit of advancement the easiest path to creative satisfaction is, of course, complex, but its affect on many technologists is simple: blind advancement is easier economically and socially than advancement which considers the happiness of the people.
Wow, that got long, and I don't know if I'm talking about biopolitics.. but I hope you enjoy the read :)
The drive to achieve is definitely a part of biopolitics- though the institutional and financial drive might be slightly more relevant. :)
DeleteThe thought that the "Creators" in our society catering to the wealthy because it's the path of least resistance is an interesting thought. It brings to mind the great painters of the Enlightenment era who often had to balance making an artistic or cultural statement with pleasing the benefactor. (See Goya's painting of the Royal Spanish Family for an interesting example- he was becoming increasing disillusioned with the monarchy but at the same time relied on them for sustenance.)
I supposed the most probable way to spur technological advancement for the poor- whether it be biotech or something else- would be if the public took enough interest and pressured/ encouraged the government to fund such projects. Not likely in the foreseeable future, so the next most probable way is if someone very wealthy took it up as (Like Bill Gates and his work on Malaria)- also not very likely since fewer and fewer people with insight (and therefore sympathy) on being middle class or poor are able to work their way up to such a position.
Interesting about enlightenment era painters. Definitely seems some what analogous to what I'm describing.
DeleteI think another way to spur technical advancement for the poor is though social change among technologists. Most technologists have ample resources for survival, and should have plenty left over to dedicate towards the greater good. Simply making it more popular organizing communities to do this can help things a lot I think. It already has in many cases.. open source movement, hackathons for causes, wikipedia, etc.
I'm optimistic that this trend will continue. Right now, big, old tech companies are struggling to compete with new, more open companies simply because technology works well when we share resources and think on a community level rather than in a walled garden fashion.
Tributaries...yes. Almost like imagining a short river that's fed by upstream tributaries and then immediately fans out as a delta...a system that is mostly "gathering" and "distributing", a "frayed" thing. We thus have to attend to many forces "feeding into" and the splayed range of consequential "outpourings." This is much to keep track of...perhaps especially (at least initially) all the influences orginating elsewhere than our own reasonings...and thus the point Raman and Tutton want us to see...that the "above" is still at work in shaping individual and collective actions.
ReplyDelete