Abstract
We live in deeply troubling times. The so-called war on terror, inaugurated by the United States and Great Britain after the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 11 September 2001, has brought about the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq and, with Iran in its sights, this most inglorious of alliances has reinstalled the imperialist project at the heart of international relations. As Hardt and Negri have persuasively argued, the Iraq conflict pivots on the issue of governmentality, and in particular the exercise of global power, the power of empire, in the name of democracy. What, we might ask, is the purpose of governmental intervention into the affairs of individuals and states? Under what conditions can these forays be justified? And what are the costs as well as the benefits of such actions?3 Terrorism is a notoriously slippery category of action performed for political ends; and one of the most horrifying of many aspects of the war on terror is that it presupposes a literal (and all too often physical) manifestation of ‘terror’ can be isolated and identified even though there is no received consensus at the national or international levels about how to define terrorism, in terms of either the activities involved in committing terrorist acts or the intentions that might motivate them.4 A war on terror is, in other words, an ‘uninterrupted conflict’ and a ‘constant war’ because it has no referent — neither a fixed object nor a precise target.
How, when, and in what way did people begin to imagine that it is war that functions in power relations, that an uninterrupted conflict undermines peace, and that the civil order is basically an order of battle?
Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended1
Empire rules over a global order that is not only fractured by internal divisions and hierarchies but also plagued by perpetual war. The state of war is inevitable in Empire, and war functions as an instrument of rule. Today’s imperial peace, Pax Imperii, like that in the times of ancient Rome, is a false pretence that really presides over a state of constant war.
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Multitude2
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
Michel Foucault, Society Must Be Defended. Lectures at the Collège de France, 1975–76, ed. Mauro Bertani and Alessandro Fontana, trans. David Macey (1976; London: Penguin Books, 2003), 266.
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire (New York: Penguin Books, 2004), xiii.
Some of the most interesting recent work on terrorism has come from the field of public economics: see especially Todd Sandler and Walter Enders, ‘An Economic Perspective on Transnational Terrorism’, European Journal of Political Economy, 20 (2004), 301–16; and ‘After 9/11: Is it All Different Now?’ Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49, 2 (2005), 259–77;
Todd Sandler, ‘Collective versus Unilateral Responses to Terrorism’, Public Choice, 124 (2005), 75–93.
See http://www.college-de-france.fr/default/EN/all/college/index.htm. See also Joseph Tanke, ‘Michel Foucault at the Collège de France, 1974–76’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 31, 5–6 (2005), 687–96.
See, in particular, Julian Reid’s essay in this volume, ‘Life Struggles: War, Discipline and Biopolitics in the Thought of Michel Foucault’; as well as Thomas F. Tierney, ‘Suicidal Thoughts: Hobbes, Foucault and the Right to Die’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 32, 5 (2006), 601–38;
and Maria Bonnafous-Boucher, ‘From Government to Governance’, Ethical Perspectives, 12 (2005), 521–34.
Foucault, ‘Governmentality’, in Essential Works of Foucault, 1954–94. Volume 3: Power, ed. James Faubion (1978; London: Penguin Books, 2002), 211.
J. G. A. Pocock, The Machiavellian Moment: Florentine Political Thought and the Atlantic Republican Tradition (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1975), 521–2.
Judith Butler, Precarious Life: The Powers of Morning and Violence (London: Verso, 2004), xi–xii.
Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, Empire (Cambridge, MA.: Harvard University Press, 2000).
For a broader understanding of the influence of Foucault’s ideas about power on Hardt and Negri’s work, see in particular: Frederick M. Dolan, ‘The Paradoxical Liberty of Biopower: Hannah Arendt and Michel Foucault on Modern Polities’, Philosophy and Social Criticism, 31, 3 (2005), 369–80;
and Real Fillion, ‘Moving beyond Biopower: Hardt and Negri’s post-Foucauldian Speculative Philosophy of History’, History and Theory, 44 (December 2005), 47–72.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2008 Lucy Hartley
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hartley, L. (2008). War and Peace, or Governmentality as the Ruin of Democracy. In: Morton, S., Bygrave, S. (eds) Foucault in an Age of Terror. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584334_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230584334_8
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-36518-0
Online ISBN: 978-0-230-58433-4
eBook Packages: Palgrave Religion & Philosophy CollectionPhilosophy and Religion (R0)