|
Biopolitics is an intersectional field between biology and politics. The term is commonly attributed to Rudolf Kjellén in the 1920s who also coined the term geopolitics; however, it appears in print at least as early as 1911.〔 G.W.Harris The New Age 1911〕 In contemporary US political science studies, usage of the term is mostly divided between a postmodernist group using the meaning assigned by Michel Foucault (denoting social and political power over life) and another group who uses it to denote studies relating biology and political science.〔Liesen, Laurette T. and Walsh, Mary Barbara, The Competing Meanings of 'Biopolitics' in Political Science: Biological and Post-Modern Approaches to Politics (2011). APSA 2011 Annual Meeting Paper 〕 ==Various definitions of biopolitics== # In Kjellén's organicist view, the state was a quasi-biological organism, a "super-individual creature". Kjellén sought to study "the civil war between social groups" (comprising the state) from a biological perspective and thus named his putative discipline "biopolitics". # The Nazis also used the term occasionally. For example, Hans Reiter used it in a 1934 speech to refer to their biologically based concept of nation and state and ultimately their racial policy.〔 # Morley Roberts in his 1938 book ''Bio-politics'' used to argue that a correct model for world politics is "a loose association of cell and protozoa colonies".〔 # Robert E. Kuttner used the term to refer to his particular brand of "scientific racism," as he called it, which he worked out with noted Eustace Mullins, with whom Kuttner cofounded the Institute for Biopolitics in the late 1950s, and also with Glayde Whitney, a behavioral geneticist. Most of his adversaries designate his model as antisemitic. Kuttner and Mullins were inspired by Morley Roberts, who was in turn inspired by Arthur Keith, or both were inspired by each other and either co-wrote together (or with the Institute of Biopolitics) ''Biopolitics of Organic Materialism'' dedicated to Roberts and reprinted some of his works. # In the work of Foucault, the style of government that regulates populations through "biopower" (the application and impact of political power on all aspects of human life).〔Michel Foucault: ''Security, Territory, Population'', p.1 (2007)〕 # In the works of Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri, anti-capitalist insurrection using life and the body as weapons; examples include flight from power and, 'in its most tragic and revolting form', suicide terrorism. Conceptualised as the opposite of biopower, which is seen as the practice of sovereignty in biopolitical conditions.〔Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri (2005). ''Multitude: War and Democracy in the Age of Empire''. Hamish Hamilton.〕 # The political application of bioethics. # A political spectrum that reflects positions towards the sociopolitical consequences of the biotech revolution.〔〔 # Political advocacy in support of, or in opposition to, some applications of biotechnology.〔〔 # Public policies regarding some applications of biotechnology.〔〔 # Political advocacy concerned with the welfare of all forms of life and how they are moved by one another. # The politics of bioregionalism # The interplay and interdisciplinary studies relating biology and political science, primarily the study of the relationship between biology and political behavior. most of these works agree on three fundamental aspects. First, the object of investigation is primarily political behavior, which—and this is the underlying assumption—is caused in a substantial way by objectively demonstrable biological factors. For example, the relationship of biology and political orientation, but also biological correlates of partisanship and voting behavior. (See also sociobiology.) 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「biopolitics」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|