Date: Mon, 4 Dec 1995 06:38:31 +1000 (EET)
From: Ashwin Kumar <akumar-AT-harpo.nepean.uws.edu.au>
Subject: The Social As A Programme For Governance - Part One


The Social as A Programme for Governance
by	
Ashwin Kumar

PART ONE:

In contrast to global theories of the state, certain thinkers have 
followed Foucault in seeking to reflect upon the nature of government 
within 'modern' societies. Linked to this is the idea of the emergence of 
'the social' as a specific domain of government and a specific sector of 
practices, interventions, and knowledges. I attempt to get at the 
strategic notion of the state and governance that emerges from Foucault 
and others. It is also an attempt to consider how we might think about 
this 'social' sector as it appears in phrases such as 'social policy' and 
'social welfare'.

If one examines Foucault's works with aims of locating or defining the 
social, it emerges through the strategic notion of 'bio-politics of 
population'(1). The social could be conceptually seen as developing in 
the bio-politics of population as "a body of influences on individual 
lives that aims to administer, optimise, multiply it by subjecting 
individuals to controls and regulatory practices"(2). The social, in this 
view, could be seen as a disciplinary technique whereby specific sets of 
techniques, instruments, procedures and bodies of knowledge are utilised 
for the purpose of social control and the formation of a disciplinary 
society. Thus the social exists as a technique for ordering human life. 
How does the social act as a programme for controlling individual lives? 
This could be seen in the process whereby techniques of power are 
exercised with aims of development of collective habits, time-zoned life 
patterns and total/detailed surveillance on individual lives. The social 
acts as a control programme with aims of making individuals more useful 
in the production processes by the objectification of the individual to 
form a body of knowledge about themselves. 

Thus the social can be viewed as reducing inefficiency of mass phenomena 
and making it more manageable by regulating movements thus reducing 
unpredictable ways to establish calculated distributions. Furthermore, 
the social also acts as a programme of social control by neutralising 
resistances to power especially for those who wish to dominate it. The 
social acts as a programme for social control as techniques of power 
could be exercised through it at the lowest cost economically over large 
majorities and in this process link the growth /extension of power with 
the output of institutions such as educational and medical. What is the 
link between the development of the social and the development of 
capitalism as distinct categories? Economic take-off in the west started 
with techniques for capital accumulation. These techniques for capital 
accumulation involved calculation and control of individuals: 
"administration of accumulation of men" (3). This is made possible by the 
formation of the social as a body of knowledge for control which created 
the technology of the subjection of individuals. As such, the division of 
labour is also produced by the social as a form of technique for 
individual subjection in the capital accumulation process. The social 
could be seen as providing a guarantee of the submission of forces and 
bodies under mass sovereignty and also allows individuals to become 
integrated into the political economy.

Donzelot identifies the social as referring to a set of phenomena which 
is used to a particular sector in which "diverse problems and special 
cases could be grouped together"(4); a sector comprising of specific 
institutions. This social sector is seen as existing alone and not 
merging with the judicial sector though it extends the field of judicial 
action. It also does not merge with the economic sector as the social is 
seen to invent an entire social economy which lays the foundations for 
"making the distinction between the rich and the poor"(5). Does the 
social react with the private/public sector? The social is seen as not 
merging with either since it also leads "to a new hybrid form of the 
public/private sectors and this produces withdrawals and interventions of 
the state"(6). Donzelot views the social as inducing new relationships 
between the public and the private sectors. The social is seen as acting 
across and reshaping existing and previous divisions. Donzelot further 
asserts that "the rise of the social and the crisis of the family are the 
two fold political effects of the same elementary causes"(7).

Minson sees the social as a regime of ethical truth such as moral 
ontology or as a kind of ethical thinking(8). The social as moral 
ontology provides the basis for value judgements and justifications. the 
social is primarily seen as an ethical entity in terms of assumptions of 
personalism in structuring ideologies, programmes, laws and policies 
which operate political values. Minson attributes the origins of the 
social in the emergence of political economy. The social is seen as 
development of certain kinds of knowledge concerning human conduct to 
able the processes of social administration and policy in the way in 
which social disorder is framed and also measures to deal with them. 
Minson is also of the view that the social, existing as patterns of 
reasoning, transforms human beings into political subjects by the process 
of objectification. The social, as a control programme, is viewed by 
Minson as "that exercised upon lower classes as relationships binding 
them into the political order" (9).

Polanyi views the social as "checks on the dynamics of modern societies 
as to the exact nature and causes of economic expansion"(10). The social 
is seen to act as a counter movement aided by legislature mechanics that 
are seen as "essential for the protection of society"(11). Polanyi treats 
the social as a form of Foucault's bio-power especially in terms of 
individual growth of possibilities and utility. Thus the social also 
becomes an organising principle in society with specific institutional 
aims and methods. Polanyi chiefly views the social as a "principle of 
social protection of society through calculative techniques with aims to 
conserve man/nature as well as the productive organisation as this relied 
on the working class"(12). It can be seen that the social becomes the 
Bentham principle of inspectibility for effective control by view of the 
social as a protectionist mechanism; a moral and intellectual advance for 
moral restraints of the population. Polanyi also views the social as 
acting through the private sector to later develop the political economy.

What is the Benthamian view of the social? It could be described as the 
scientific and economic treatment of the poor through the concepts of 
social mechanics as the intellectual main spring of the industrial 
revolution (13). The social is seen here as the eighteenth century "new 
social science of morals and legislation"(14)on the principle of utility 
which allows exact calculations. The social is also viewed as an attack 
on individualisation to forming collectives in the production process. 
The social is essentially viewed as a form of legislation to provide for 
individual solidarity and enhance social usefulness. The rise of the 
social is attributed to the industrial revolution "as having caused a 
social dislocation in people through the principles of social 
legislation"(15).


Gamble examines the rise of the social by an examination of the rise of 
capitalism (16). The social here is positioned as "the need that 
industrialised societies placed at the creation of legitimate political 
institutions and government"(17). The social is seen as allowing 
governmentality as a programme of social control: "social control allows 
the rapid control of the masses for rapid growth of material wealth 
through the production process"(18). It is evident in Gamble's analysis 
of the social that with the increased emphasis on production generate 
great concerns about the character/control of the economy through 
conditioning people and also their resistance. The social is seen as 
conditioning individuals into calculated values to create consensus and 
the social is also responsible for the conditioning of the resistances of 
the working classes to social conditions by the deployment of knowledge 
and forms of self evaluation by objectifying societal relations on 
ethical and moral scales.


How does the governance of the economy and the political system work to 
link the social to anticipated effects in a particular form of society? 
It is through the principle of individualising whereby collective action 
through the state is used in the regulation of the economic system. The 
social is also viewed by social theorists as having effects that 
undermine individualism by the formation of collective identities and 
consensus of values in society via collective identities. Lukes views 
individualism as underlying the view that holds collective action through 
the state in the regulation of economic systems (in particular for 
welfare ends) as undesirable at certain established limits(19). This 
belief is based on the principle of individual liberty, methodological 
individualism and contingent claims about individual desires and motives.

The principles of individualisation are counteracted by the deployment of 
the social in the formation of collectives for aims of social control. 
Individualism also dictates that state interventions through social 
programmes should be kept to an absolute minimum. Nozick suggests that a 
minimalist state limited to the narrow functions of protection and 
enforcement of social contracts is justified; "that any more extension of 
the state in the name of social programmes especially in areas of morals, 
would violate individual rights and that the minimalist state is aspiring 
and right"(20). Furthermore, Nozick suggests that social programmes in 
the name of collective interests are "illicit"(21).

P.T.O - Part Two


     ------------------