Foucault’s statement on power can be understood as an interchangeable relationship depending on the context of the situation. Foucault’s views on politics, power and government can be used to better understand the funding and regulation aspect of education. Power is present in all interactions and can be used to explain contests between various key players, like the government, teachers and students.
In the case of “Australia education fails, one in four young people-but not the wealthy ones”, Foucault’s view that power which is exercised as a power relation is useful to understand in this context. The traditional belief of power as “being held by a dominant group” (Gauntlett, D. ‘Foucault on Power’,p129,2008) emphasizes exploitation. In this …show more content…
Privatization caused an increase as school fees increased “from four hundred and nineteen dollars per annum to six thousand five hundred dollars.” It may increase bad debt which affects the country’s economic growth. Resistance was produced by its students and parents in the form of grumbles to say the least. In this case, there is an interchange of power play as this bill was later abolished, proving that power is productive and can be positive. In Australia, its citizens have chances to actually win the struggle against the government for certain bulls to be passed. It is a model where governing in multiple and dispersed and involves persuasion. However, this may not be so in other countries. In Singapore, the government “frequently found themselves in a powerful position, or had many chances to exercise power.’’ (Gauntlett, D. ‘Foucault on Power’,p128,2008)Bills deemed as suitable by the government was passed, regardless of whether or not it benefited the target audience. It has the tendency to veer towards authoritarianism, where power tends to be centralized. The community is rendered helpless. The traditional view of power is more valid to examine Singapore. It varies from country to country and Foucault’s view is therefore limited by different
In the case of “Australia education fails, one in four young people-but not the wealthy ones”, Foucault’s view that power which is exercised as a power relation is useful to understand in this context. The traditional belief of power as “being held by a dominant group” (Gauntlett, D. ‘Foucault on Power’,p129,2008) emphasizes exploitation. In this …show more content…
Privatization caused an increase as school fees increased “from four hundred and nineteen dollars per annum to six thousand five hundred dollars.” It may increase bad debt which affects the country’s economic growth. Resistance was produced by its students and parents in the form of grumbles to say the least. In this case, there is an interchange of power play as this bill was later abolished, proving that power is productive and can be positive. In Australia, its citizens have chances to actually win the struggle against the government for certain bulls to be passed. It is a model where governing in multiple and dispersed and involves persuasion. However, this may not be so in other countries. In Singapore, the government “frequently found themselves in a powerful position, or had many chances to exercise power.’’ (Gauntlett, D. ‘Foucault on Power’,p128,2008)Bills deemed as suitable by the government was passed, regardless of whether or not it benefited the target audience. It has the tendency to veer towards authoritarianism, where power tends to be centralized. The community is rendered helpless. The traditional view of power is more valid to examine Singapore. It varies from country to country and Foucault’s view is therefore limited by different