Re-cognising Power: A Discourse Analysis of Power Relations Anna Bennett, BA Hons. (University of Newcastle, NSW) A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. The University of New South Wales, 2000. Abstract Power is a relational dynamic which produces a disparity of effects that cannot be reduced to an exclusive morality, good or bad, or a particular consciousness, nor can it be considered the synonym for control. It is not something that works according to a single causality, positive or negative. This is not generally acknowledged, rather in both academic and popular discourse power is primarily thought to be an exclusive possession of a particular subject or social agent with a specific intent. In these discourses, power is dominated by a metaphoric sense of property, as something which belongs to the state, government, capital, or technology. It is thus conceptualised in terms of a possession/dispossession opposition. Discourse about power is preoccupied with identifying its locus and with indicating a particular type of relation which is repressive. This obscures the fact that power is in fact a feature or ontological property (in the primary sense i.e: the quality, substance or nature) of all people in relation to one another, and is active within all interaction and discourse. Although his early works were concerned with other issues, Michel Foucault dedicated his attention mid-career to the study of power. His preeminent studies questioned the location of power in relation to the state, arguing that power is not an exclusive commodity but an interactive relational dynamic. This thesis maintains that Foucault's critique remains significant because the metaphoric equation of power with repression is still deeply entrenched in contemporary discourse on power. Unfortunately, at the end of his life Foucault moves away from his insights about power and in volumes II and III of The History of Sexuality he changes his approach, overlooking power's ubiquity and again preferring to anchor it in the 1 prevailing rhetoric of repression. He does this by privileging the notion that modem sexuality is governed by institutional powers which most significantly promote austerity and repression. Many foucauldians have collapsed Foucault's theory of power with a simple notion of authority. This undermines his earlier warning that "power is not an institution.. .let us not look for the headquarters that presides over its rationality" (Foucault, 1990a:95). This thesis refines and develops Foucault's more neglected insights into the peculiar ontology of power, emphasising the central point that power is not the referent for a single relation but is a dynamic active within all relations, both social, interpersonal and even intrapersonal. It is ever present and is a dynamic that manifests in many different ways. It can be repressive, enabling, and considered differentially to be negative and/or positive at the same time. One cannot control its effects as it can be inadvertent or unconscious, self-defeating, self-producing, perverse and/or ambiguous. It is therefore composed of a generalised and indeterminate efficacy, rather than an intentional will or direction. The common attempt to disassociate oneself from power, to identify it as the property of the state or of another, and as producing a single effect of good or evil, I argue, is in itself one of the empirical facts of power at work relationally. The case studies examined in this thesis illustrate the fact that power manifests in many different ways. It is the moving substrate of all interests: that of "the revolutionary", "the theorist", "the apathetic" and also "the model citizen". Therefore because all discourses of power produce multiple and indeterminate effects, and because this fact is not recognised, their ontology demands further attention. ii Acknowledgements Through this doctoral journey I have had the privilege of meeting many interesting people and have enjoyed the support of dear friends and family, all of whom have assisted the development of my ideas and skills. In particular I am grateful for the excellent supervision which Dr.Vicki Kirby has provided me. Her perceptive insight has been invaluable in facilitating the development of this thesis. She has always expressed a keen interest in my topic and has paid great attention to facilitating the development of it, instilling in me a respect and care in developing its articulation. To my family and friends who have inspired and supported me through the PhD journey: John Bennett, lmbi Martin, Isla Lonie and Lenore Neath. Thank you. I am grateful for the encouragement which Dr. Kathryn Owler and Dr. Ralph Robinson have given me in reading and editing drafts. I have also been fortunate in establishing the support and friendship of Anita Lundberg and many others through postgraduate seminars and conferences. I thank Assoc. Prof. Kerry Carrington, a mentor whose interesting work, research, courses and generous support are the source of inspiration which has encouraged me to further study. I dedicate this thesis to my mother Dr. Jeanette Martin who has read endless drafts and has shared many discussions. Thank you! I hope that my new baby Heath finds a richness in life similar to that which I have experienced in the years of exploring this thesis. Ill Contents ABSTRACT i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii CONTENTS iv INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER ONE: The Subject Is Power 9 1. Foucault's Critique of "State Theory" 12 2. Foucault's Critique of Marxist Structuralist Theories of Power 18 3. Foucault's Genealogical Method 20 4. Foucault's Genealogy of the Governmental State 23 5. The Governmental State 28 6. Governmentality 29 7. The State 31 CHAPTER TWO: The Foucault Effect 33 1. Foucault's Founding Empirical Projects: Early Career 34 a) Madness & Civilisation b) The Birth of the Qinic c) The Order of Things d) The Archaeology of Knowledge e) I, Pierre Riviere 2. Strengthening the Theory of Power: Mid-Career 46 a) Discipline & Punish b) Governmentality c) Power d) The History of Sexuality, Volume I 3. A Change In Direction: Late Career 57 4. Conclusions 59 iv CHAPTER THREE: The Ontology of Power 61 1. The Epistemological Study of Power 63 2. Epistemology Reconsidered 69 3. The Ontology of Power 71 4. An Ontological Method: Discourse Analysis 74 5. Foucault's Return to Ideology Critique 75 CHAPTER FOUR: The Foucauldian Effect 77 1. Changes in Foucault's Account of Power 79 2. The Foucauldians: Embracing the Early Foucault 82 a) The Institutionalisation of Power? b) Power* Discipline c) Power* Capacity d) The Rationalisation of Power? e) Power* Restriction CHAPTER FIVE: "A Society of Government": The Tyranny of "the Weak" 119 1. TheAmericanMilitias 123 a) The Organisation b) Ruby Ridge c) "Militia Day" d) A Position of Powerlessness? The Oklahoma City Bombing e) Power & Productivity 2. Discourses about Waco 136 a) The Analyses 3. Hansonism 144 a) Hanson b) The Power of Everyday Observation c) Power As Commodity d) Power & Interest e) Contra-Hanson & The Socialist Worker f) Complicity g) The Politics of Power: Eristic Negotiation h) Governmentality v 4. The Unabomber 161 a) The Crimes b) The Manifesto c) The Ideology of Return d) Power e) Leftism f) Freedom g) Revolution 5. The Power of Denial 174 CONCLUSION 176 BIBLIOGRAPHY 180 APPENDICES: 192 Appendix 1: Pauline Hanson's Maiden Speech 192 Appendix 2: The Truth 195 Appendix 3: The Unabomber's Manifesto 198 vi Introduction We all know the fascination which the love, or horror, of the state exercises today; we know how much attention is paid to the genesis of the state, its history, its advance, its power and abuses, etc. The excessive value attributed to the problem of the state is expressed, basically, in two ways: the one form, immediate, affective and tragic, is the lyricism of the monstre froid we see confronting us; but there is a second way of overvaluing the problem of the state, one which is paradoxical because apparently reductionist: it is the form of analysis that consists in reducing the state to a certain number of functions, such as the development of productive forces and the reproduction of relations of production, and yet this reductionist vision of the relative importance of the state's role nevertheless invariably renders it absolutely essential as a target needing to be attacked and a privileged position needing to be occupied. Foucault, 1991a: 103. 1 When one approaches the issue of power the general assumption made is that it is an exclusive possession, owned and exerted by a specific group. Power is thought to have a singular locus and a specific point of operation from where it works to repress others. Power is considered to be held by authority. In fact, power is generally assumed to be synonymous with authority. It is thought to be a position to be acquired, that it is something whose possession exists in potentia. Power is aspired to through the exercise of resistance and its final realisation in revolution. This style of thought invariably renders power active in the form of the state "as a target needing to be attacked and a privileged position needing to be occupied" (Foucault, 1991a: 103). As will be explained in the opening chapters, the fact of state power is not refuted by Foucault. It is with the abstracted practice of investing the state with all power whilst overlooking the complex of powers which flow throughout the population, and which make possible what the population comes to recognise as "the state", that Foucault took issue. Foucault attempted to challenge the dominant assumption that power is an exclusive possession and his work on power remains timely as discourses on power have changed little since the inception of his critique in the mid 1970's.