The death sentence as capital punishment is an example of how bio-power and necropolitics can be inextricably linked. Discuss.
Bio-power is a concept developed by Michel Foucault. Essentially, bio-power looks at ‘docile bodies’ and how they are used by the state to increase the capital and production of the state. It poses the question; how can the health and well-being of the nation benefit the production of the nation state? Necropolitics builds on Foucault’s idea of bio-power. Bio-power is concerned with the physical health and life of an individual while they are alive. Necropolitics is an extension of this concept, developed by philosopher J.A Mbembe. Necropolitics acts as an extension as it deals with the same bodies but when they are …show more content…
The death sentence, as a form of capital punishment, offers many contradictions within the constitution of the state that allows it. For example, America has been one of the main practitioners of the death sentence yet assisted suicide for individuals with fatal or debilitating illnesses is outlawed. The contradiction here lays in the fact that the method of execution that is employed by the American judicial system is through the use of a lethal injection, similar to the injection that is carried out for euthanasia. Through the framework of bio-power and necropolitics, it can be understood that euthanasia is outlawed as the state has no way of profiting from this kind of death. Braidotti refers to this as “bio-genetic capitalism” . The individual with the illness cannot contribute to the labour force of the state but they do not pose any threat to the productivity of the rest of their nation or to the authority of the state. Therefore, they are deemed fit to stay alive by the state. Euthanasia and suicide can also be viewed as an individual undermining the state. Prisoners do not have the right to a death at their own hands, they must be executed by the state that governs them through means that are illegal to everyone but the afore mentioned state. This shows that the state, or ‘sovereign power’ to borrow Foucault’s terminology, enacts laws that restrict the means of death to individuals but leaves them unrestricted for the state so they can retain as much power as possible over human life. Foucault addresses this power struggle of suicide and the state in saying that “It is not surprising that suicide [was] once a crime, since it was a way to usurp the power of death which [was] the sovereign
Bio-power is a concept developed by Michel Foucault. Essentially, bio-power looks at ‘docile bodies’ and how they are used by the state to increase the capital and production of the state. It poses the question; how can the health and well-being of the nation benefit the production of the nation state? Necropolitics builds on Foucault’s idea of bio-power. Bio-power is concerned with the physical health and life of an individual while they are alive. Necropolitics is an extension of this concept, developed by philosopher J.A Mbembe. Necropolitics acts as an extension as it deals with the same bodies but when they are …show more content…
The death sentence, as a form of capital punishment, offers many contradictions within the constitution of the state that allows it. For example, America has been one of the main practitioners of the death sentence yet assisted suicide for individuals with fatal or debilitating illnesses is outlawed. The contradiction here lays in the fact that the method of execution that is employed by the American judicial system is through the use of a lethal injection, similar to the injection that is carried out for euthanasia. Through the framework of bio-power and necropolitics, it can be understood that euthanasia is outlawed as the state has no way of profiting from this kind of death. Braidotti refers to this as “bio-genetic capitalism” . The individual with the illness cannot contribute to the labour force of the state but they do not pose any threat to the productivity of the rest of their nation or to the authority of the state. Therefore, they are deemed fit to stay alive by the state. Euthanasia and suicide can also be viewed as an individual undermining the state. Prisoners do not have the right to a death at their own hands, they must be executed by the state that governs them through means that are illegal to everyone but the afore mentioned state. This shows that the state, or ‘sovereign power’ to borrow Foucault’s terminology, enacts laws that restrict the means of death to individuals but leaves them unrestricted for the state so they can retain as much power as possible over human life. Foucault addresses this power struggle of suicide and the state in saying that “It is not surprising that suicide [was] once a crime, since it was a way to usurp the power of death which [was] the sovereign