Several of the key concepts of biopolitics have come under scrutiny since the outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic. This volume brings into discussion how biopolitics can be conceptualized critically within a milieu of mass healing, such as in India. Contributors to this volume discuss crucial themes like geropolitics and pandemic reflections on the question of old age, borders and logistics in a world emerging from the pandemic, immunization of humans and humanization of immunity, thus defining the Indian contexts of the biopolitical problematic. Extending its analysis into a retrospective vision of thought traditions and socio-political underpinnings that shaped modernity and post-coloniality in India, it also explores the medico-therapeutical discourse embedded in philosophy of medicine and philosophical modernity tracing its interstitial positioning as therapeutic-assemblages in a milieu of mass healing. This book will be useful for scholars and researchers of biopolitics, philosophy, political philosophy, sociology, science and technology studies, medical sociology, health and well-being, and cultural studies.

This book asks a deceptively simple question: what are states actually doing when they do penance for past injustices? Why are these penitential gestures - especially the gesture of apology - becoming so ubiquitous and what implications do they carry for the way power is exercised? Drawing on the work of Schmitt, Foucault and Agamben, the book argues that there is more at stake in sovereign acts of repentance and redress than either the recognition of the victims or the legitimacy of the state. Driven, it suggests, by an interest in 'healing', such acts testify to a new biopolitical raison d'état in which the management of trauma emerges as a critical expression of attempts to regulate the life of the population. The Penitent State seeks to show that the key issue created by the 'age of apology' is not whether sovereign acts of repentance and redress are sincere or insincere, but whether the political measures licensed in the name of healing deserve to be regarded as either restorative or just.

This book offers an original analysis and theorization of the biopolitics of development in the postcolonial present, and draws significantly from the later works of Michel Foucault on biopolitics. Foucault’s works have had a massive influence on postcolonial literatures, particularly in political science and international relations, and several authors of this book have themselves made significant contributions to that influence. While Foucault’s thought has been inspirational for understanding colonial biopolitics as well as governmental rationalities concerned with development, his works have too often failed to inspire studies of political subjectivity. Instead, they have been used to stoke the myth of the inevitability of the decline of collective political subjects, often describing an increasingly limited horizon of political possibilities, and provoking a disenchantment with the political itself in postcolonial works and studies. Working against the grain of current Foucauldian scholarship, this book underlines the importance of Foucault’s work for the capacity to recognize how this degraded view of political subjectivity came about, particularly within the framework of the discourses and politics of ‘development’, and with particular attention to the predicaments of postcolonial peoples. It explores how we can use Foucault’s ideas to recover the vital capacity to think and act politically at a time when fundamentally human capacities to think, know and to act purposively in the world are being pathologized as expressions of the hubris and ‘underdevelopment’ of postcolonial peoples. Why and how it is that life in postcolonial settings has been depoliticized to such dramatic effect? The immediacy of these themes will be obvious to anyone living in the South of the world. But within the academy they remain heavily under-addressed. In thinking about what it means to read Michel Foucault today, this book tackles some significant questions and problems: Not simply that of how to explain the ways in which postcolonial regimes of governance have achieved the debasements of political subjectivity they have; nor that of how we might better equip them with the means to suborn the life of postcolonial peoples more fully; but that of how such peoples, in their subjection to governance, can and do resist, subvert, escape and defy the imposition of modes of governance which seek to remove their lives of those very capacities for resistance, subversion, flight, and defiance.

Scientists, scholars, and artists consider the political significance of recent advances in the biological sciences. Popular culture in this “biological century” seems to feed on proliferating fears, anxieties, and hopes around the life sciences at a time when such basic concepts as scientific truth, race and gender identity, and the human itself are destabilized in the public eye. Tactical Biopolitics suggests that the political challenges at the intersection of life, science, and art are best addressed through a combination of artistic intervention, critical theorizing, and reflective practices. Transcending disciplinary boundaries, contributions to this volume focus on the political significance of recent advances in the biological sciences and explore the possibility of public participation in scientific discourse, drawing on research and practice in art, biology, critical theory, anthropology, and cultural studies. After framing the subject in terms of both biology and art, Tactical Biopolitics discusses such topics as race and genetics (with contributions from leading biologists Richard Lewontin and Richard Levins); feminist bioscience; the politics of scientific expertise; bioart and the public sphere (with an essay by artist Claire Pentecost); activism and public health (with an essay by Treatment Action Group co-founder Mark Harrington); biosecurity after 9/11 (with essays by artists' collective Critical Art Ensemble and anthropologist Paul Rabinow); and human-animal interaction (with a framing essay by cultural theorist Donna Haraway). Contributors Gaymon Bennett, Larry Carbone, Karen Cardozo, Gary Cass, Beatriz da Costa, Oron Catts, Gabriella Coleman, Critical Art Ensemble, Gwen D'Arcangelis, Troy Duster, Donna Haraway, Mark Harrington, Jens Hauser, Kathy High, Fatimah Jackson, Gwyneth Jones, Jonathan King, Richard Levins, Richard Lewontin, Rachel Mayeri, Sherie McDonald, Claire Pentecost, Kavita Philip, Paul Rabinow, Banu Subramanian, subRosa, Abha Sur, Samir Sur, Jacqueline Stevens, Eugene Thacker, Paul Vanouse, Ionat Zurr

1. Within trauma : an introduction / Eric Wertheimer and Monica J. Casper -- I. Politics -- 2. Trauma is as trauma does : the politics of affect in catastrophic times / Maurice E. Stevens -- 3. "She was just a Chechen" : the female suicide bomber as a site of collective suffering in wartime Chechen Republic / Francine Banner -- 4. Naming sexual trauma : on the political necessity of nuance in rape and sex offender discourses / Breanne Fahs -- 5. Conceptualizing forgiveness in the face of historical trauma / Carmen Goman and Douglas Kelley -- II. Poetics -- 6. Bahareh : singing without words in an Iranian prison camp / Shahla Talebi -- 7. Voices of silence : on speaking from within the void (a response to Shahla Talebi) / Gabriele M. Schwab -- 8. Future's past : a conversation about the Holocaust with Gabriele M. Schwab / Martin Beck Matuštík -- 9. "No other tale to tell" : trauma and acts of forgetting in The road / Amanda Wicks -- 10. Body animations (or, Lullaby for Fallujah) : a performance / Jackie Orr -- III. Praxis -- 11. First responders : a pedagogy for writing and reading trauma / Amy Hodges Hamilton -- 12. Answering the call : crisis intervention and rape survivor advocacy as witnessing trauma / Debra Jackson -- 13. Documenting disaster : Hurricane Katrina and one family's saga / Rebecca Hankins and Akua Duku Anokye -- 14. A cure for bitterness / Dorothy Allison

Biological immunity as we know it does not exist until the late nineteenth century. Nor does the premise that organisms defend themselves at the cellular or molecular levels. For nearly two thousand years “immunity,” a legal concept invented in ancient Rome, serves almost exclusively political and juridical ends. “Self-defense” also originates in a juridico-political context; it emerges in the mid-seventeenth century, during the English Civil War, when Thomas Hobbes defines it as the first “natural right.” In the 1880s and 1890s, biomedicine fuses these two political precepts into one, creating a new vital function, “immunity-as-defense.” In A Body Worth Defending, Ed Cohen reveals the unacknowledged political, economic, and philosophical assumptions about the human body that biomedicine incorporates when it recruits immunity to safeguard the vulnerable living organism. Inspired by Michel Foucault’s writings about biopolitics and biopower, Cohen traces the migration of immunity from politics and law into the domains of medicine and science. Offering a genealogy of the concept, he illuminates a complex of thinking about modern bodies that percolates through European political, legal, philosophical, economic, governmental, scientific, and medical discourses from the mid-seventeenth century through the twentieth. He shows that by the late nineteenth century, “the body” literally incarnates modern notions of personhood. In this lively cultural rumination, Cohen argues that by embracing the idea of immunity-as-defense so exclusively, biomedicine naturalizes the individual as the privileged focus for identifying and treating illness, thereby devaluing or obscuring approaches to healing situated within communities or collectives.

"Examines how low female desire is produced, embedded, and lived within neoliberal capitalism. Rethinks 'femininity' by investigating sex research that measures the disconnect between subjective and genital female arousal, contemporary psychiatric diagnoses for low female desire, and new models for understanding women's sexual response"--