Jump to content

CBHS Debater

Member
  • Content Count

    68
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About CBHS Debater

  • Rank
    Banned
  • Birthday 01/06/1992
  1. type "landfill waste biodiversity" into google. this isn't the type of argument where you need access to lexis nexis or have to check out 20 books.
  2. here's a cap impact Elina Penttinen 2000 (August, Department of political science and International Relations FIN- 33014 University of Tampere “Globalization, Bio-power and Trafficking in Women” < www.csun.edu/~iggd00/IPSA_Quebec_papers/IPSAPenttinen.doc> p.3-5) Foucault also argued that the development of bio-power required the concept of humanity linked with the concept of social body. This means that bio-power is both operated on individuals singularly and as a whole. The development of humanity as concept that all human beings belong to was important for the successful institutionalization of modern capitalism, for this facilitated also the subjectification into the imaginary ideal of modern capitalism. Foucault claims that capitalism is precisely based on the discipline of the social body to fit the needs of the production and economic processes (Foucault 1998: 100). Capitalism is also an example of how bio-power subjectifies individuals in particular and en masse, being linked to the development of the idea of the social body in the nineteenth century (Foucault 1980). The social body was to be ordered, disciplined and protected by the state. The discipline involved a benevolent power. The extending functions of the state, which were both individualizing and totalizing, were to lead in benefit of individuals and of the society as a whole (Foucault 1983, 1988, 1991). This development of governance of the state amounts to a form of governmentality. The governmentality of a nation-state would extend the guidance and discipline to single private economies (households) and be produced at a more totalizing level of the liberal state. This required the notion of the social body, which was attached with norms of morality and health (Foucault 1980) and also certain disciplining and training of the body. Globalization of the world-economy has altered the ways in which bio-power is produced and implemented. Thus, also the rationalization of bodies has taken different forms and especially different scope in the global-age than during the development of modern capitalism. The bio-power of globalized world-economy overrides the nation-state as the primary determinant of the government of individualization and produces a new totalizing and individualizing global and globalized governmentality, which subjectifies individuals directly. What ties together the governmentality of modern capitalism and the governmentality of the globalized world economy is the underlying regime of truth, grounded in liberalist notions of the individual. The governmentality of the global capitalism ties the individual by the rationalization of the subject according to labor, capacities and innovation for the mass-production and mass-consumption processes. The liberalist ideology that is the grounds of neo-liberalist global governance of corporate capitalism is driven and institutionalized by a new transnational class, multilateral institutions and state managers (Axtman 1998, Rupert 1997). These institutions set global rules influencing national policy-making and aiming to construct a free-trade based world market system, which for some may seem, more a system of neo-constitutionalism (Gill 1995) or a system of bureaucratization that erodes national sovereignty in the face of corporate elites, and for the benefit of transnational capital (for discussion see; Rupert 1997). The new system of rules and institutions exemplified by treaties such NAFTA or GATT, subjectify individual directly by the changes in the governance structure by the formation of expanded neoliberalist discipline. The governmentality also draws individuals as subjects and objects through the established global consumer culture that requires also commodification of labor and consumerist subjectification. In this sense the governmentality of the global-age constitutes the forms of market lead international governance with the ideology of consumer society. These inhere the subjectification of individuals according to liberalist principle of both rationalism and consumption. The subjectification is derived from active participation in the globalized system of consumer culture. This is one of the concerns here in terms of subjectification. Yet I want emphasize the subjectification of individuals within globalized world-economy happening, roughly categorized, in two levels; First, by the institutionalized neoliberal governmentality of globalized world-economy, meaning the forms of governance, established institutions and treaties, methods of surveillance and discipline of global capitalism, containing the ideology of liberalism of growth and progress for all harnessed through neoliberal practices and global policies. Second, as this governmentality of global capitalism leaves very little room for active agency of individual people, they are subjectified in terms of needs of production, being resources as labor and more importantly as consumers of the mass-produced goods and global culture. The dynamic is then between the global and local, and the nation-state looses importance in terms of subjectifying power and in terms of means for individual agency. The subjectification can be seen happening in the dynamic of global forces with local responses.
  3. this card's alright... but definitely not the hot shit you're making it out to be To explore further, however, Žižek’s conclusion about violence, he suggests that it is often the case wherein we – nations and individuals - haven’t properly analysed the violent situation with which we might be situated. And we could be blindly throwing punches when we have no idea what we are fighting for, or indeed what we think we might achieve from it. Žižek’s radical solution to this: do nothing! He appeals to Badiou in saying “better to do nothing than to contribute to the invention of formal ways of rendering visible that which Empire already recognizes as existent” or precisely that today’s threat is from those who need to appear to be “active” in order to keep concealed some deeper level of violence, apropos the “liberal communists”. As this violence is so well concealed doing nothing, for Žižek, is often the only thing one can be sure that they are doing right. The conclusion I drew from Žižek’s study of violence is that to do nothing is the only responsible thing to do when the pursuit only serves to strenghten the current violent order – that being liberal capitalism. But what might have helped this radical conclusion would be for Žižek to detail an appropriate form of violence, in opposition to the traditional liberal approach of “greatest happiness” with all its inherent problems (such as the example of the “torture option” or the case of Alan Dershowitz (i). Also the study could have made explicit references to the Žižek et al theological turn. But it is easy to just say this, what issues could Žižek make reference to in a theory of ethical violent theology?
  4. i guess that means i won
  5. hullo, my name's kiersten, kiersten strachan

  6. you're a joke. i've read every book ever written by arendt, and will be selling my 900 page homecut arendt k on evazon pretty soon.
  7. if you're interested in buying the files, send me a pm
  8. well, you gotta put em in their place...
  9. it's probably not un-ethical, but it's definitely very stupid.
  10. agreed - that's what i've said from the beginning. the issue isn't necessarily that thehutt hasn't done anything useful, it's that he's made countless promises, and countless excuses every time he failed to live up to those promises. and let's be honest - this is pretty much the only responsibility the virtual debate mods have... the fact that he can't perform such menial tasks properly says a lot more about his competence than his obvious laziness.
  11. no, i dont do closed deals. either offer a trade, or i'll sell each file for 50 bucks, or all of them for $1,500 No, there is no mistake here... dude, i can tell you're ignorant. none of my files are redundant, each has its own unique spin on the philosophy. and none of my files are camp, theyre all home cut. camp files are shit, my files range from 300 to 1000 pages, and have every aff argument ever written blocked out.
×
×
  • Create New...