7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
1/15
48
FoucaultStudies
JacquesDonzelotandColinGordon2008
ISSN:1832
5203
FoucaultStudies,No5,pp.4862,January2008
INTERVIEW
Governing Liberal Societies the Foucault Effect in the English
speakingWorld1JacquesDonzelot,UniversityofParisXNanterre
ColinGordon,RoyalBrompton&HarefieldNHSTrust
JD: Inthetwovolumesofhis lecturesof1978and1979,weseeMichelFoucault
makingamajor intellectual changeofdirection,movingaway fromananalysisof
power as the formation and production of individuals towards an analysis of
governmentality,aconceptinventedtodenotetheconductofconductsofmenand
women,working through their autonomy rather than through coercion even of a
subtle kind. Out of this concept and the extended analysis of political economy
whichprovidesthematerialforitselaboration,Foucaultneverproducedapublished
work.Hebrokeoffthisseriesofinvestigationstooccupyhimselfuptohisdeathin
1984with
the
writing
of
two
books,
which
were
evidently
closer
to
his
heart,
of
a
historyof the subjectpassingbywayof theCare of the selfand theUse ofPleasure
(Foucault 1989a 1989b). This however did not prevent this concept of
governmentalityfrommeetingwithgreatsuccess intheEnglishspeakingworld, in
manywaysstimulatingthereanintellectualdynamicmoreintensethaninthecaseof
hispublishedworks,which rapidlybecame classicsandwere treated as suchand
with thedeference thatstatusentailed,butnotwith theexcitementwhichmet the
lectures on governmentality. In 1991, your volume The Foucault Effect (Burchell,
Gordon, Miller 1991) set off this dynamic by centring the effect in question
preciselyonthisnotionofgovernmentality.ButinFranceFoucaultslecturesonthe
subjectwerenotpublisheduntil2004andwithoutatfirstarousinggreatinterest.So
whataccountsforthissingularsuccessofFoucaultsreflectionongovernmentalityin
theAngloSaxonworld?
CG: WehadafewadvantagesinBritain.Inthefirstplace,Foucaultinhislifetime
wasmoreeasygoingaboutforeigntranslationsofhisinterviewsandlecturesthanhe
wasabouttheirpublicationorreprintinginFrance.Theremayalsohavebeenmore
1
Translated
with
minor
revisions
from
Esprit,
Novembre
2007,
82
95:
Comment
gouverner
les
socitslibrales?LeffetFoucaultdanslemondeAngloSaxon.
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
2/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
editorial latitude forjuxtaposing thismaterialwith theworkofpeoplewhowere
collaborating,virtuallyoractually,withFoucault.SomeofFoucaultsimportantlater
lectures and textsdealingwithgovernmentweregiven inAmerica andoriginally
published there. InTheFoucaultEffect Iwas able topublish a summary,basedon
lecturenotes
and
tapes,
of
his
governmentality
lectures:
many
people
could
certainly
havedonethesameinFrance.
Secondly,thereisthedifferenceinthenationalpoliticalconjuncture.InFrance
after 1981, thedominantpreoccupation remained socialism rather than liberalism,
whereasFoucaulthad seen the importanceof liberalism as apolitical issueand (I
believe)conceivedhis1979lecturespartlyinresponsetotheconjunctureoftheLefts
1978electoraldefeatatthehandsofGiscarddEstaing.Itisreasonabletosupposehe
would not have greatly lamented the defeat of a Left coalition in which the
Communist Party played amajor role.Here Foucault presents neoliberalism as a
modern
political
rationality
worthy
of
attention
and
a
certain
intellectual
respect,
while commenting that democratic socialism for its part has failed to engender a
distinctive governmental rationality. This seemed a prescient and pertinent
observation to some of us in Britainwhowere entering in 1979 on 18 years of
Conservativegovernment,whereas in1981Francewas toenteron twentyyearsof
mainlysocialistgovernment,endowedwiththelegacyofthetrenteglorieuses,the
three French postwar decades of notable socioeconomic progress. Viewed from
across theChannel, theFrenchsocialistgovernmentsseemed tobeprotecting,and
indeed extending these enviable accomplishments, while a rightwing British
governmentwasbusy dismantling the semicorporatist postwar national system,
andotherEnglishspeakingcountriesoverthesameperiodweregettingadoseofthe
samemedicine.2
JD: One can entirely accept this explanation of the success of governmentality
studiesintheAngloSaxoncountries.There,neoliberalismtriumphedandbecamean
objectofstudywhereasinFrance,giventherelativedominanceoftheSocialistParty,
we had to struggle for twenty years to produce a reflection on the socialwhich
uncoupled it from socialism and addressed it in terms of the governability of
democracy.Showing thatthereexistedanacceptableexitfromsocialismseemedto
usmoreimportantthangraspingthesubtletiesofliberalismasapoliticalrationality.Ihave inmindaseriesofauthorsworking to thatagenda, includingRobertCastel
and myself, who were for a time close to Foucault, and others like Pierre
Rosanvallon,whowerenot,whoexemplifythisnationalparticularityofourrelation
tothequestionofgovernment,incontrasttowhatyousayaboutthedestinyofthat
questionintheEnglishspeakingcountries.
2 ThoughThatcherhadfallen frompowerbythe timeTheFoucaultEffectwaspublished; in the
80s
the
British
Lefts
preferred
intellectual
guide
for
the
understanding
of
Thatcherism
was
Gramsci,notFoucault.
49
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
3/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
OnecanalsowonderifthefactthatFoucaultsreflectionwasatoddswiththis
Frenchconjuncturemightnothavecontributedtoacertainhardeningofhispolitical
stanceinthisterrain,adifficultyinpositioninghimselfwhichledtoabandoningthis
aspectofhisreflectiontoconcentrateonthecareoftheself?Becausethecontextwas
avery
delicate
one
:he
had
parted
company
with
his
revolutionary
links
without
lapsingintothekindofpoliticalphilosophywhichhehated,thequestionofregime,
oftheState,ofallthoseofficialobjectswhichhehad beensowellabletobypass.It
wasalsothemomentwhenthecircleoffriendsaroundhiminthe70sbrokeupand
hecontentedhimselfwitha fewclosesupporters. Inawayyou inventedaFrench
Foucauldianschoolwhichneverexisted,ornolongerexistsinFrance,but,withthis
Foucaulteffectwhereyouassembledtextsfromthisloosegroupoffriendsinthe
70s, werent you fabricating an artefact which gave the illusion in AngloSaxon
countriesofadynamicwhichnolongerexistedinFrance....andtherebymanagedto
produce
one
in
those
countries?
Hence
my
second
question
what
was
it
that
led
to
thisinterestingovernmentalitythere?
CG: Itisquitetruethatinourvolumewedidnotinformourreadersaboutsome
politicalandpersonaldisagreementsbetweenourauthors,wherewecouldnotsee
thatthesewerelinkedtoaclearintellectualdifference.Myintroductiontoourbook
was(asIadmitted) anattempttoconstructaplaneofconsistencebetweenthework
of individualswho, in some cases, had nevermet, and in otherswere no longer
collaboratorsordesiring tobeperceived as such. 3The fabrication ofour artefact
ended up taking some time, nearly a decade in all: Foucaults death in 1984
complicatedandchanged the termsof theproject,whichhadbeenbegunwithhis
knowledge and approval, in variousways.Now that five volumes of Foucaults
lecturesfromthe1970shavebeenpublished,however,onecanmoreeasilyseehow
muchofwhatbecame, fora time,a shared researchprogrammewasalreadywell
developedinhisownwork,inpartswellbefore1978.
AstoFoucaultstrajectory,Ithinkitiswithhis1976lectures,atthelatest,that
he starts todistancehimself from themilitant idealof the time.Thediscussion in
those lectures of Sieys and the Third Estate seems already to prefigure his later
reflectionon the formidable capabilitiesof liberalismas apolitical rationality.The
intellectual path that led Foucault from the analysis of disciplines to that ofgovernmentality is perfectly consistent, just as the theme of governmentality
connectsconsistentlyinturnwithhislaterthemesofcareoftheselfandtruthtelling.
LetsalsorememberthatthislateFoucault,whoissupposedtohaveretreatedinto
solitarystudyoftheChurchfathersandthehistoryofthesacramentsofpenitence,
was also the treasurer of the French branch of Solidarnosc, engaged in public
3 SylvainMeyetpointsout,accurately,thatnocontributortoourvolumeexceptFoucaulthimself
and
the
editors
explicitly
uses
the
term
governmentality.
Travailler
avec
Foucault.
Retours
Sur
Le
Politique,eds.SylvainMeyet,MarieCcileNaves,ThomasRibmont,LHarmattan,Paris2005.
50
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
4/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
discussion with the socialist trade union leader Edmond Maire, and in an
institutionalprojectwith the law reformerandjusticeminister,RobertBadinter. It
seems,asMichelSenellartrightlynotesinhisexcellenteditorialpostfacetothe1978
79 lectures, that Foucaults interest in liberalism and neoliberalism is verymuch
connected,around
1978,
with
his
support
for
the
East
European
dissidents.
There
is
a
markedanticommunistcontextinhislecturesof19789.
Ihavealwaysbeensurprisedthattherewassolittlecontemporaryresonance
atthetimeinFranceforFoucaultsworkongovernmentality.In1979,Foucaultsaid
that hewouldwork in the following years lectures on the genealogy ofpolitical
partiesespecially,Ibelieve,thatoftheFrenchSocialistparty.Isuspectthathewas
discouraged from pursuing this planby the limited success of his dialoguewith
friendsin,orcloseto,theSocialistParty.Perhapshisanticommunismstillposedtoo
manyproblems.Buttherewasneveranysignthathehadrepudiatedthisseriesof
analyses.
In
the
following
years,
he
encouraged
and
supported
some
young
researchershetaughtatBerkeleywhodidresearchintogovernmentalityinAmerica.
Atthetimeofhisdeath,hehadabookannouncedforpublicationwithEditionsdu
SeuilentitledLegouvernementdesoietdesautres.
I never thought that Foucault would have been in serious political
disagreementwithyourworkataroundthistimeorindeedthatyouwouldbelikely
todissent fromhisviewsaboutsecurityandautonomy in theWelfareState,asset
out inhis discussionwithRobertBono of theCFDT. Indeed I tried to show that
Foucaults analyses of liberalism were consistent with the approach of your
Linventiondusocial(Donzelot[1984]1994),notablyinthelecturehegavein1979on
FergussonsHistoryof
Civil
Societywhereheseesemerginganotionofsocietyasa
transactional reality, amobile surface of engagementbetween the practices of
governmentandtheuniverseofthegovernedwhichconstantlytendstoescapetheir
grasp.WhereashehadclearpoliticaldifferenceswithDeleuzewhowasanother
philosophicalgenius,butnogeniusinpolitics.Nowadays,asyouknow,thereasare
manypeopleintheworld,academicsinparticular,whofavouraDeleuzianFoucault
interpretedby Antonio Negri, as there are people interested in governmentality
studies.While the successivewaves ofposthumouspublication and circulation of
Foucaultswork are reaching and inspiring new generations of readers, some of
thosewho responded to his publishedwork of the 70s and 80smayby nowbelookingelsewhereforstimulatingnovelty.
AsfortheresultsofEnglishspeakinggovernmentalitystudies(nottospeakofwork
in the rest of theworld outside France), it is hard to give a short and summary
answer.NikolasRoseandMitchellDeanpublishedbookswhichhavebeenseenas
aimingtosystematisegovernmentality,tomakeitintoatheoreticalprogramme.But
manypeople(andprobablybothoftheseauthors)woulddenythatthereisorwasa
governmentalityschoolinanyclearcutsense.Apartfromthereferencetoalimited
set of canonical textsby Foucault, there is typically a focus round the issue of
51
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
5/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
liberalism and liberty, signalling the need to take liberalism seriously as an
intellectual forcewhich is also subject to historical transformation. Some original
fields of research havebeen developed, such as thework of PeterMiller on the
genealogy of management, and of Paul Rabinow and Nikolas Rose on
biotechnologies;links
have
been
made
with
other
approaches,
notably
with
Latour
and actor network theory, inwork on government at a distance.James Tully,
Duncan Ivison,TomOsborne,GrahamBurchell,and Ihavebeen interested in the
affinities between Foucaults works on governmentality and certain currents of
Englishlanguagehistoryofpolitical thought, suchasJohnPococksworkon civic
republicanism. Then there is work by people who were taught by Foucault at
Berkeley, including interesting studiesofmoderngovernmentalitybyDavidHorn
andKeithGandal,andJonathanSimonsimportantworkonAmericanpenaljustice.
InrecentyearsitisalsobecomingclearerthatFoucaultslegacy,andparticularlyhis
work
on
governmentality,
has
had
major
international
impacts
in
the
rapidly
changingdisciplinesofgeography4 and anthropology and thenew and important
sectorofpostcolonialstudies.
Does thiswork imply a distinctive political orientation? Inbroad termswe are a
loosefaction inthepostNewLeftdiasporawhichisstillinsearchof itsmoraland
ideologicalidentity;moreparticularly,anepisodeintheexperienceofaLeftcoming
to termswitha freshadventandpartial triumphof liberalism.There isnotmuch
evidenceofadirect impactof thisbodyofworkon thepoliticaldomain. Iamnot
aware thatBlaireverreadFoucault.AnthonyGiddens, fora time theBlairClinton
court philosopher, usually includes a caricatural account of Foucault only as a
marginal item inhisdoctrinaldigests.But I thinkpartsof the formulaeofClinton
andBlairfora thirdwaymayhaveeffectivelycarriedoutaformoftheoperation
whichFoucaultmighthavebeentakenaschallengingthesocialiststocontemplate
theselectiveincorporation,inanupdatedandcorrectedsocialdemocracy,ofcertain
elementsofneoliberalanalysisandstrategy.Insomeways,itisthecontinuationofa
trend initiated inthe70sbySchmidt inGermany,Giscard inFranceandHealey in
Britain,andinherdifferentwaybyThatcherthetruthtellingroleofgovernment,
inaworldofglobaleconomicuncertaintyandcompetition,asmoraltutorofcitizens
in an ethic of enterprise and responsibility.The success of this formula inBritainseemedforalongtimetobelimitedonlybytheirritabilityofcitizensandtheclaims
of thefourthestate, themedia, tomakeandunmakegovernmentalpower(bothof
these reactions being severely aggravated, of course, by Blairs extension of his
governmental agenda to include the neoconservative enterprise of civilisational
confrontationandglobalwaronterror).
4
Space,
Knowledge
and
Power.
Foucault
and
Geography,
ed.
Jeremy
W.
Crampton
and
Stuart
Elden,
Ashgate2007.
52
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
6/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
Governmentalitystudies,wheretheyareidentifiableassuch,havebeenan
academic activity governed by prevailing institutional and discursive norms;
Foucaultswork,while inspiring tomany,doesnothave the capacity to turn lead
into gold.As part of this discursive order, there hasbeen an ongoing discussion
aboutwhich
side
such
investigations
are,
or
should
be,
on:
that
of
anew
rationalisationofgovernment,or thatofacritiqueof such rationality?Noonehas
quitefollowedthetrajectoryofFrancoisEwald,fromagenealogyofsocialinsurance
toanethicalontologyofriskasthenoblespiritoftheenterprisingclass.Allthesame,
the theme of governmentality hasbecome involved in a debatewhere some are
accusedbyothersofseekingtolegitimate,ratherthantoproblematise,theideaofa
risksocietyconsideredas the ineluctablecontemporary formofcollective reality
whichallcitizensandgovernmentaltechniquesarenecessarilyobligedtoconfront.
The reception of Foucaults analysis of neoliberalism unfortunately often
seems
to
be
flattened
into
a
set
of
polemical,
ideological,
and
globalising
generalities,
dispensingwiththekindofdescriptiveinvestigationFoucaultundertookin1979of
thedifferentavatarsofneoliberalismwith theirnational,historical,and theoretical
specificities.Indeed,neglectofpostwarhistoryseemstobeafrequentfeatureofthis
polemicaldiscourse:fromarecentbookonneoliberalismbyDavidHarvey,apost
moderngeographerwhoviewsFoucaultswork asobsolete,onemight think that
neoliberalismhadbeeninventedinthe1970s.
Ihopethefullpublicationoftheselectureswillrevitalisethisareaofresearch.
I think their publicationwill also show that this notion of governmentality can
usefullybeappliedalongsideFoucaultsearlierand later ideas (power/knowledge,
discipline, government of self, perihelia). The theme of governmentality certainly
needs tobeseen in itscontinuitywith the themesof thelateorfinalFoucault
(we are only talking here of an interval of five or six years): ethics, care of self,
parrhesia or truthtelling, the conditions of existence of critical discourse. To
understand these implications in fullwewillhave to await thepublicationof the
finallectures.
JD: After thisharangue, Iplunged into thegovernmentalitystudies forwhich
youhadpointedmetosomeofthekeyprotagonists.AndIemergedatleastforthe
momentwithmixedfeelingsofpleasureandunease.
Thepleasurewasespeciallyinreadingsectionsofthebookscoeditedandwrittenby
NikolasRoseFoucaultandPoliticalReason,ThePowersofFreedom,andthearticlesof
Thomas Lemke. All of these show the pertinence of analysis in terms of
governmentality in addressing neoliberalism. They all rely on the Foucaldian
refutationofafixeddistinctionbetweenthedomainoftheStateandthedomainof
civilsociety,betweenthedomainofpowerandthedomainofsubjectivity.Theyuse
ittoshowthattheretreatoftheStatewhichissupposedtoconstituteneoliberalism
infactcorrespondstoanextensionofgovernment.
53
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
7/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
Thisextensionismadepossiblebyreplacingthedirectgovernmentofsociety
by theStatewitha formofgovernmentat adistance.There isadestatificationof
governmentwhichgoes inhandwith theappearanceof social technologieswhich
delegate responsibility for individuals to other autonomous entities: enterprises,
communities,professional
organizations,
individuals
themselves.
The
use
of
contractual agreements,definedofobjectives,measuresofperformance, combined
with localautonomy,allows thisshiftof responsibility togovernmentalactionata
distance.Inthisperspective,Individualsaretobecomeexpertsofthemselves,to
adoptaneducatedandknowledgeablerelationofselfcareinrespectoftheirbodies,
theirminds,theirformsofconductandthatofthemembersoftheirownfamilies
(RoseinFoucaultandPoliticalReason(1997,59f)).Individualsbecomeentrepreneurs
ofthemselves,anditisassuchthattheyarebondedintosocietythroughthechoices
theymake, the risks they take, and the responsibilities for themselves and others
which
thereby
arise
and
which
they
are
required
to
assume.
Citizenship
is
consequentlynolongerexercisedinarelationshipwiththeStateorwithinapublic
space (such a spacebecoming indeed difficult to discern as such), somuch as a
varied rangeofprivate, corporateorquasipublicpractices, ranging fromwork to
consumption: the consumer citizenbecomes an active agent in the regulationof
professionalexpertise; theprudentcitizenbecomesanactiveagentofsecurity, the
citizenasemployeebecomesanactiveagentintheregenerationofindustry (ibid.)
It isat thispoint,at thisequationof the simultaneousgrowthof individual
autonomyandresponsibilityonebelievesoneselfautonomous:whatisworse,one
is;but thisautonomy isdesigned tomakeus intoagentsof the system thatmy
uneasebegins.NotbecausetheanalysisisfalseIentirelyendorseitasanecessary
stage, as far as it does but because it is presented as sufficient, whereas the
underlyingquestions startjust at thepointwhere it stops, sureof itselfandof its
intellectual effect. The sophisticated social technologies of advanced neoliberal
society,ittellsus,containanenlargedcomponentoffreedomalongwithanenlarged
componentofrequiredresponsibilityincomparisonwiththoseoftheWelfareState.
Just as the lattermarked an advance on oldstyle political economy, so political
economyhad represented amovebeyond themodelof reasonof state.Eachnew
modelisevaluatedonlyagainsttheperformanceofitspredecessor:theyarealways
analysedattheirtechnicallevel,neverintermsofapoliticalcriterionorintermsofvalue. This is the cost of the ability of governmentality studies to describe the
materiality of social technologies while avoiding, for instance, the habitual
denunciationsofneoliberalism as an ideological rhetoricdesigned tomask a false
economictheoryandapracticalantihumanism,asMarxistsandantiglobaliserslike
toputit.Butdoesnttheavoidanceofthatkindofsimplificationlead,initsturn,toa
centralambivalenceatthecoreofthiskindofanalysis?Isntthatwhatyouyourself
point outwhen you say that this kind of analysis can lead either to a critique of
politicalrationalityortoarationalisationofthissamesetofpolicies?
54
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
8/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
In terms of political rationalities, in France we can all think of Francois
Ewaldscelebrationofriskwrittenfromhiscurrentstandpointasaleadingofficialof
thenational employersorganization.This is a classic caseof countertransference
wheretheanalystfallsblindlyinlovewithhisobject,inthiscasethetechnologyof
insurance,and
finds
in
itthe
key
to
all
problems
of
social
and
political
life.
But the other standpoint, the critique ofpolitical rationality, canbeno less
irritatingwhenitispresentedasaselfsufficientconclusion.Iwillgivetwoexamples
whichhavestruckme frommyrecent remedialreadingcourse ingovernmentality
studies.
The first is fromNikolasRosesbookPowers ofFreedom. In a chapter called
the communitycivility game,he tries to establish aparallelbetweenBenthams
famousPanopticonandthevirtuesclaimedforitbyBenthamintermsofpreserving
morality,stimulatingindustryandspreadingeducation,andthequalitiesattributed
to
the
notion
of
community
promoted
by
authors
like
Etzioni,
Putnam,
Fukuyama
andBelloch (already a somewhathastilyamalgamatedgroup),orwith thatof the
idea of associational networks considered as new diagrams of power, promoting
moral conducts in likewise subtly imperiousways. The we of community is
shown as exercising a technicomoral authority akin to that of the penitentiary
Panopticon.AtastroketheFoucauldiananalysisofgovernmentalityasconductof
conducts, as action at a distance, loses its distinction from the disciplinarising
techniquesofthe19thcentury.Butmoreseriousisthewaythisassimilationserves
thecultivationofapostureofradicalcritique.
In Barbara Cruikshanks analysis of the function of the notion of
empowermentintheUSA,Ifoundthissameinclinationtoadoptapostureofradical
critiqueat thecostof losing thesubtlecapabilities inherent inof thisnotionof the
conductofconducts.Whenshedenouncestheinvitationtoselfempowerment,she
isnotsofarfromourownJeanBaudrillardandhiscelebrationoftheinertiaofthe
silentmajorityasaformofresistancetothemoderninjunctionstoparticipationand
expression.One needs tobe aware that she is analysing Californian Welfare to
workprogrammeswhicharemoresystemsofforcedlabourunderharshconditions
than steps to theempowermentof individualsover themselvesor in their relation
with others:whereas this themeof empowermentdoes also and above allhave a
dimension of acquisition of power over oneself thanks to the power which thecollectiveonebelongstoisabletoproduce.Thecollectiveinthiscaseisnotthought
ofasdemandingasacrificefromtheindividual,butratherasanecessarysupportfor
individualselfaffirmation.Butthechoicesasexamplesofthesecaricaturalinitiatives
mayalsoserveasindicatingawishtocultivateanexclusivelycriticalposture.
One can also wonder if this ambivalence of these analyses in terms of
governmentalitymay not lead them to incline towards one side or the other, the
criticalor the laudatory side,dependingon the locationwhere it is conducted. In
AngloSaxoncountrieswhereneoliberalismwas imposed from thestartof the80s,
Foucault studiesprovide themeansofa sophisticatedcritique,albeitonewhich is
55
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
9/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
visiblylackingacapacitytoproposealternatives. Doesthispoliticalambivalencein
the notion of governmentality not condemn it to serving an ideological function,
determinedbypoliticalcircumstance,whereasitaspirestobepreciselytheantidote
ofanideologicalreadingofformsofgovernment?
CG: One negative feature of the Foucauldian diaspora is that people can be
seduced by the idea of revealing the truth of the present, but this is can be
contaminatedbyatasteforhyperbolicdiscourseswhichexceedanycriticalpurchase
onthereal.TheleadingexampleofthisisnodoubttheworkGiorgioAgamben,who
detects in all government a virtual programme of extermination, and views the
conditionofthegovernedasuniversalreductiontotheconditionofhomosacer,and
the likeminded commentatorswho in theUK seeeveryBlairite innovation in the
policingoffamiliesasastepontheroadtoserfdom.
As
for
the
question
behind
your
question,
that
is
to
say
Foucaults
critical
standpoint visvis governmentality in terms of its potentiality for progressive
technical invention, I suggest this brings us back to the distinctive quality of
liberalism itself. Foucault says that the liberal art of government consists in the
productionandconsumptionoffreedom,thecreationanddestructionoffreedom.It
is (as some say) the government of freedom and (as others remind us) the
governmentofunfreedom5orrather,thegovernmentofafreedomwhichisitself
anunfreedom.Liberals(KeynesandBeveridge)werearchitectsoftheWelfareState:
otherliberalshavebeenitscriticsandreformers.Itistheparadoxofliberalisminall
itsforms(neo,advanced,post...)thatmuchactionisnecessarybeforeonecanlaisser
faire
actioneventotheextentofactingtobringintoexistencethereality(freedom,
society)whichitisdesiredtolaisserfairefairesocit,asindeedyouhaveitinthe
titleofyourrecentbook.Hence,onemightpartlycountersomeofyourreproaches
by saying that this kind of analysisbrings out the ambiguity and ambivalence of
liberalrealities,inadvanceofanyquestionofthepracticalconsequencesonechooses
orfailstochoosetoinferfromtheanalysis.
Thedetached,WeberianvaluefreedomofFoucaultsdescriptionoftheconstitutive
operationsofliberalismasagovernmentalitymaylooktosomelikeadisarmingof
thepowerofcritique.Youareaskingwhetherandhow,havingunlearnedtheeasyrhetoric of denunciation, one can then reintroduce a pertinent basis for critical
evaluation.
In the first place, the very experience of a degree of discomfort at the
paradoxes,antinomiesandaporiasofliberallibertymayhelpleadtohealthylucidity
rather than moral incapacitation. Further, this element of detachment does not
prevent,buteven encouragestheintroductionofcertaincounteranalyseswithinthe
5
Hindess,
B.
(2001)
The
Liberal
Government
of
Unfreedom,
Alternatives:
Social
Transformation
andHumaneGovernance,26:93111.
56
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
10/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
termsoftheliberalparadigm: forinstance,thetheoryofsocialcapital inventedby
Robert Putnam (that is, of the resourceswhich individuals draw from relational
networksofsolidarityand localandprivate formsofmutualsupport),oragain, in
relationtotheLockeantheoryofselfownershipasthenecessaryfoundationof the
liberaleconomy,
the
requirement
that
each
person
be
endowed
with
the
necessary
resources toenable thatselfownership tobeeffective inpractice (asRobertCastel
arguesinhisrecentbookonSocialInsecurity,intermsinterestinglysimilartothoseof
AmartyaSensworkoncapabilityrights).
Havingsaidthis,manywhoworkingovernmentalstudiesdonotfeelcalleduponto
takeupthetasksyouproposetothem.Inthebookyouquote,NikolasRosewrites
thatinthistypeofworktheaimistodestabilizeandthinkbeyond allthoseclaims
madebyotherstogovernusinthenameofourownwellbeing,andthatstudiesof
governmentality
do
not
try
to
put
themselves
at
the
service
of
those
who
would
governbetter[5960].Thissounds likeaformofknowledgewhichwantstoserve
onlyonthesideofcontestation.However,whilerecognisingthecriticalcontribution
whichhis analyseshave indeedmade,othersmightwish at least toqualify those
statements of position (which Nikolas himself firmly refuses to assert as group
doctrines).Becauseitishardtoseewhyitshouldbeanecessaryaxiomofthestudy
ofgovernmentalitythatallgovernment(evenonewhichclaimstotakeaccountofthe
goodof thegoverned) isanevil in itself,or that thewish togovernbetter should
necessarilybe something fromwhich one ought ethically to disassociate oneself.
Certainly,Foucaulthimself said that critique isnotobliged toharness itself to the
programmingofa reformdesignedonly tomaintainanexisting relationof forces,
buthealsosaidthatintalkingwithagovernmentonecanbedeboutetenfacethat
is, engage indialogue as an independent and equal interlocutor. In this view of
things, critique, struggle, discussion and collective invention are compatible and
complementary tasks. I suppose that itwas not out of puremalice that Foucault
suggestedtotheFrenchSocialistsin1979theprojecttoinventagovernmentalityof
theirown;he indeed subsequently showed some evidenceofwillingness to assist
withthattask.
Theseductiveelement inFoucaults rereadingof liberalismwas the thought
thattheartofbettergovernmentwaspresentedastheartofgoverningless,andthatin this sense liberalism forms an autocritique of governmental reason: a
governmentality which develops and corrects itself through its own critique.
Alongside this therewashisother seductivenotionofcritique (inspiredbyKants
definitionofEnlightenmentasanemancipationfromtutelage)asanindocilityofthe
governed,awillnot tobegoverned somuchor in suchaway.That iswhere the
permanent task of critiquewoulddemand an inventive sequel:how to govern in
order tobe governed less, how to govern in order tobe governed or to govern
oneself in the way one wishes? Here wemeet Foucaults refusal of the double
blackmail, by the policy experts for whom a critique is invalidated if not
57
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
11/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
accompaniedbyaprescriptionforreform,andbythosewhousetheconversecharge
of recuperation, forwhom every unprejudiced discussion ofwhat is possible or
desirablecomesdowntoacapitulationofcritiquebeforethestatusquo.6
Itistruethatmostofushaveremainedatacertaindistancefromtheattempts,
inthe
English
speaking
world
as
in
France,
to
remoralise
politics
through
the
injectionofneworreviveddoctrinesofcivicanddemocraticvirtue.Somethinkers,
like William Connolly and James Tully, have made interesting attempts to
incorporatevaluesofdifference andmultiplicity inpolitical ethics.My readingof
yourrecentbookFairesocitsuggeststomethatyoualsosubscribetothatgeneral
project.
Why have we kept our distance from these initiatives(apart from the
considerationthattodayscivicpedagoguesaresometimestooeasilyrecognisableas
recycledrevolutionaryideologues)?ForheuristicreasonsFoucaultdrewadistinction
between
his
field
of
research
on
governmental
practices
and
the
history
of
the
politicaldoctrineofsovereigntyanditslegitimatefoundation,thehistoryofcitizens
andtheir rights.Thismayhavebeeninitiallynecessaryandeffectiveasameansto
establishandmakevisibleanewobjectof study (except in respectofmaking that
newobjectvisibletohistoriansofpoliticalthought),butIthinkitistimenowfora
more connectedapproach so thatwe can look, for instance, atwhat relation there
might be between a certain notion of citizenship and a certain way of being
governed7.Thismighthelpustothinkmoreeffectivelyaboutwhatwearebecoming
andwhatwewishordonotwishtobecome.
AnotherbenefitofFoucaultsinitiativewhichhasbeennoticedrecentlyisthat
it anticipates the effects of globalisation in relativising the status of national state
institutions.8ItsurprisedmethatFranoisEwaldandBlandineKriegelsaidrecently
thatFoucaultwasconcernedwithproblemsofhistimeandthatnowwehaveother
concerns. Foucaults concerns in his later years seem to me to include notably
neoliberalism, Islam, security, ethics, and the rights and global solidarity of the
governed,allissueswhichIthinkwestillrecogniseaspertinenttoday.
JD: Iagreewiththisideathattheconceptofgovernmentalityhasaprescientvalue
in relation to globalisation, because it registers, in a sense in advance, the
relativisation of States and nations, and I would also see in this advantage anenhancedpossibilityoflinkingthetechnical:analysisofgovernmentalitywiththe
moralanalysisofformsofcitizenshipcorrespondingtothisnewhistoricalcontext.
6 To state what may be obvious: Foucaults insistence on recognising the critical and anti
essentialistcomponentsofliberalismandneoliberalismdoesnotmeanthatthesedoctrinesare
thereforetobeconsideredasthepermanenthomelandofcriticalthinkingingeneral.7 As early as Histoire de la Folie, Foucault had identified the modern political problem of
reconciling
the
two
incarnations
of
the
citizen,
the
man
of
law
and
the
man
of
government.
8 CF.WLarnerandWWalterseds.GlobalGovernmentality.GoverningInternationalSpaces.(2004)
58
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
12/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
The analysis of neoliberal governmentality shows a common orientation of
developed countries striving to adapt to new realities. This orientation involves
reducingthedirectroleofStatesintheeconomyandsocialrelations,infavourofa
new economy of social relations which emphasises autonomy and individual
responsibilityat
all
the
local
levels
where
autonomy
and
responsibility
can
be
brought into interaction. In this sense,neoliberalgovernmentality is indeedapure
technicalproductof critiques addressed to theWelfare State for thepasty forty
years: leftcriticsdenouncing thecreation in thenameofprogressofanorderever
moredisposed tocontrol individuals, reducing theireffectiveautonomyunder the
guise of an enhanced solicitude, and critics on the right who indicted the
dismantling of the order necessary for progress through the deresponsibilising of
individualslivingundertheincreasingcareoftheState.Thedifficultyofsustaining
aneverrisingburdenofStaterevenueswithoutaffectingtheglobalcompetitiveness
of
enterprises
prompted
governments
to
use
and
play
off
these
two
critiques
against
eachother, tocounter thegrowthofdemandsand recriminationsaddressedat the
State.
The civicquestionissolittleforeigntothistechnicalsolutionthatitarisesoutof
the very fact of its application. For it is all very well to govern at a distance,
relegatingtothelocalleveltheplayofencountersbetweentheneedsforautonomy
and thedemand for responsibility.That still requires that these localities, these
diverse groupings, communities, enterprises, collectivities, form a society, and are
nottoodisparate,toomutuallyestranged,tooindifferenttoanythingoutsideoftheir
owndestiny,tooincapableofasharedappreciationofwhatisrightandjustforall
membersoftheseconstructedcollectivities.Heretherearisesthequestionofconsent
tosharedinstitutions,andthereforetothesharedcoststheyimpose.Thisconsentisa
form of civic engagement (civisme), its abstract incarnation, which we can
counterposetothedirectmutualtrustofpeopleandcitizenswithinthelocalframeof
thespecificcommunitywheretheylive.
Trustandconsentaretworelativevalues,thebalanceofwhoserolescanvary
in the production of a civic society. They are in some sense the equivalents for
citizenship of what autonomy and responsibility represent in the context of
governmentality.Theycallforasimilarconcernfortheirmutualadjustmentwhatis the right relation of these two registers to permit the establishment of a civic
society? And the intersection of these two registers, the technical register of
autonomisation and responsibility, and the civic relation of consent and trust
determines theway theconcern forgovernmentaleffectivenesssucceedsor fails to
connectwiththerealisationofacivicsociety.Bringingtogetherthesetwodemands
allows us to pose the question of how to make society exist in the context of
neoliberalism.ItseemstomethatEuropeistheplaceparexcellenceforthesearchfor
equilibriumbetween these two lines of transformation, the onewhich affects the
governedandtheonewhichaffectsthecitizen.
59
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
13/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
CG: Consent and trust and also, if possible, respect, are certainly thingswhich
everygovernmenttodaydesirestoproduceandtoenjoyrespectbeingincidentally
the item which others most like to deny government, at least in Britain. The
productionof
respect
demands,
in
turn,
persuasion
and
pedagogy.
Persuasion
for
the social classes which are resistant to change because they feel insecure, and
pedagogy for theminoritieswhomaybe inclined todisorder or revolt.On these
subjects,alongsideFoucaultsaccountsof thepastoral functionofgovernment it is
worth reading PaulVeynes essay on the irritability of the governed, When the
individualisfundamentallyaffectedbythepoweroftheState(EconomyandSociety,
Vol. 34,No. 2,May 2005, translatedbyGraham Burchell). Veyne explains how
Romanopinionwashumiliatedandviolatedbythespectacleofaruler,theemperor
Nero,whoforcedtheruledtoserveastheaudienceofanaestheticperformance.In
Britain
we
until
recently
had
a
political
leader
who
was
the
great
tenor
of
what
you
yourself in the80sdubbedthecoming civilisationofchange: themanoftruthas
changemaker,tellingthetruthofglobalcompetitivemodernityandtheconsequent
obligationofallandeachtobechanged.But,justasFoucaulttaughtus,ittranspires
thatpeoplecanresistanything,evengovernmentalparrhesia,even thepedagogyof
realityandtheethicofchange.Themanofchangeandtruthwasnotassassinated,
buthewasaccusedbyavocalsegmentofpublicopinionsofbeingacorrupteranda
liar.Nogovernmentalitywillabolishresistancetogovernment.
Couldthecurrentsofworkandreflectionwehavebeendiscussingcontributetothe
formationofaEuropeanpoliticalculture?Itwouldbeagoodidea,asGandhisaid
ofWesterncivilisation.Foucaulttalkedperhapslessaboutthecommonmarketthan
the socialmarket (expect perhaps in that enigmatic question in one of his 1976
lectures:andwhat ifRome,once again,were to conquer revolution?): is anyone
writingthehistoryofthelinkagebetweenthosetwothemes?9
Foucaultsketchedthe20thcenturyinternationaltransfers(sometimescovert,
oftenmediatedbyemigrationandexile)ofneoliberaltechniquesandformulae,much
as he had outlined the internationalmovement of ideas around 1900 on crime,
security and socialdefence. Itwouldbe interesting today to continue thiskindof
analysis, tracing for instance the transferbetweennational andpolitical camps ofnotionsandtechniquesofsocialexclusionandinclusion.
Perhaps we need to enlarge our thinking even beyond the still growing
Europeanspace.Itisworthnotingthattheglobal(atleastAnglophone)impactofthe
9 Itisinterestingthatinhis1979lecturesonliberalismFoucaultcitesKantsPerpetualPeaceonthe
cosmopolitan right, prescribedby nature, of global free trade. The guarantee of perpetual
peace is, in effect, commercial globalisation (la plantarisation commerciale) [2004, 60: my
translation].
Cf.
W
Walters
and
J
H
Haahr,
Governing
Europe.
Discourse,
Governmentality
and
EuropeanIntegration(2005).
60
7/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
14/15
FoucaultStudies,No.5,pp.4862.
notionand themeofgovernmentalityhascoincidedand inseveralcases interacted
withthegrowthofthenewdisciplineofpostcolonialstudies.Therelationbetween
proponentsofpostcolonial studiesandFoucaultsworkhavebeen, ina somewhat
similarway to the situation in feminist studies, contested and often contestatory;
sometimesone
has
the
impression
of
ageneration
of
fractious
and
needy
orphans,
afraidof theirown freedom,whocannot forgiveFoucault for failing towrite their
books as well as his, or for only having written the books he lived to write;
nevertheless, theencounterhas led tosomebeginningsofanalysesofcolonialand
post or neocolonial styles of governmentality.10 Perhapswe are also seeing the
beginningsofanewanalysisofthequestionwhichpreoccupiedFoucault,alongwith
neoliberalism,in19789,namelyIslamicgovernment,togetherwiththenowvery
current question of the possible civil and politicalmodes of existence ofMuslim
citizens in societieswith a liberal regime of government. If a European political
culture
was
capable
of
accommodating
and
welcoming
such
reflections,
it
would
be
a
stepforwardforEuropeandtheworld.
TranslatedbyColinGordon
Bibliography
Barry,Andrew, ThomasOsborne andNikolas Rose, Foucault and Political Reason:
Liberalism,Neo
Liberalism,
and
the
Rationalities
of
Government.London:Routledge,
1996.
Burchell, Graham, Colin Gordon and PeterMiller, The Foucault Effect: Studies in
Governmentality. Chicago,IL:UniversityofChicagoPress,1991.
Cruikshank, Barbara, The Will to Empower: Democratic Citizens and Other Subjects.
Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress,1999.
Dean,MitchellM.,Governmentality:PowerandRule inModernSociety.London:Sage
PublicationsLimited.,1999.
Dean,MitchellM. andBarryHindess,GoverningAustralia: Studies inContemporary
Rationalitiesof
Government.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,1998.
Ivison, Duncan, The Self at Liberty: PoliticalArgument and theArts of Government.
Ithaca,NY:CornellUniversityPress,1997.
Rose,Nikolas,PowersofFreedom:ReframingPoliticalThought. Cambridge:Cambridge
UniversityPress,1999.
Steven Legg, Beyond the European Province: Foucault and Postcolonialism, in
10 For a useful survey see Steven Legg, Beyond the European Province: Foucault and
Postcolonialism
In
Jeremy
Crampton
and
Stuart
Elden
(Eds)
Space,
Knowledge,
and
Power:
FoucaultandGeography(op.cit.)
61
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=Barbara%20Cruikshank&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/102-5641436-8834540http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=Nikolas%20Rose&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/102-5641436-8834540http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=Nikolas%20Rose&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/102-5641436-8834540http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-handle-url/index=books&field-author-exact=Barbara%20Cruikshank&rank=-relevance%2C%2Bavailability%2C-daterank/102-5641436-88345407/31/2019 L-Donzelot Collins Sobre Recepcion Anglo de Foucault
15/15
Donzelot&Gordon:GoverningLiberalSocieties
62
JeremyCrampton and StuartElden, Space,Knowledge andPower: Foucault and
Geography.Kent:AshgatePublishing,Ltd.,2006.
Tully, James, An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Context. Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversityPress,1993.