Make and Let Die: Untimely Sovereignties

his collection of essays by one of medieval studies' most brilliant historians argues that the analysis and critique of biopower, as conventionally defined by Michel Foucault and then widely assumed in much contemporary theory of sovereignty, is a sovereign mode of temporalization caught up in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Biddick, Kathleen (auth)
Other Authors: Joy, Eileen A. (Editor)
Format: Electronic Book Chapter
Language:English
Published: Brooklyn, NY punctum books 2016
Subjects:
Online Access:OAPEN Library: download the publication
OAPEN Library: description of the publication
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

MARC

LEADER 00000naaaa2200000uu 4500
001 oapen_2024_20_500_12657_25489
005 20190326
003 oapen
006 m o d
007 cr|mn|---annan
008 20190326s2016 xx |||||o ||| 0|eng d
020 |a P3.0136.1.00 
020 |a 9780988234048 
040 |a oapen  |c oapen 
024 7 |a 10.21983/P3.0136.1.00  |c doi 
041 0 |a eng 
042 |a dc 
072 7 |a HPCF  |2 bicssc 
100 1 |a Biddick, Kathleen  |4 auth 
700 1 |a Joy, Eileen A.  |4 edt 
700 1 |a Joy, Eileen A.  |4 oth 
245 1 0 |a Make and Let Die: Untimely Sovereignties 
260 |a Brooklyn, NY  |b punctum books  |c 2016 
300 |a 1 electronic resource (258 p.) 
336 |a text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a computer  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a online resource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
506 0 |a Open Access  |2 star  |f Unrestricted online access 
520 |a his collection of essays by one of medieval studies' most brilliant historians argues that the analysis and critique of biopower, as conventionally defined by Michel Foucault and then widely assumed in much contemporary theory of sovereignty, is a sovereign mode of temporalization caught up in the very time-machine it ostensibly seeks to expose and dismantle. For Michel Foucault, biopower (epitomized in his maxim "to make live and to let die") is the defining sign of the modern, and he famously argued that the task of political philosophy was to cut off the head of the classical (premodern) sovereign, the one "who made die and let live." Entrapped by his supersessionary thinking on the question, Foucault argued that the maxim of "to make live and let die" of modern sovereignty superseded a premodern sovereignty characterized by the contrasting power "to make die and let live." The essays collected in Biddick's book (some reprinted and some published here for the first time) argue that Foucault spoke too soon about the supposed "then" of the classical sovereign and the modern "now," and this became painfully apparent in his analysis of Nazism in his later lectures, Society Must be Defended. There Foucault groped to articulate an anguishing paradox: How could it be that the Nazis, as the ultimate biopolitical sovereign machine, would insist on an archaic (premodern) mode of sovereignty in their death camps? Here is how he posed the question in that lecture: "How can the power of death, the function of death, be exercised in a political system centered upon biopower?" Foucault left this question hanging. 
540 |a Creative Commons  |f https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/  |2 cc  |4 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ 
546 |a English 
650 7 |a Western philosophy, from c 1900 -  |2 bicssc 
653 |a biopolitics 
653 |a medieval history 
653 |a political theology 
653 |a historiography 
653 |a criticial theory 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/id/e41d707a-0b0a-4c58-a4f5-1b531a59baf9/1004606.pdf  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: download the publication 
856 4 0 |a www.oapen.org  |u http://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/25489  |7 0  |z OAPEN Library: description of the publication