Pinning down Power in Ukraine Crisis: West versus RussiaBright Mhango
In February 2014, the people of Ukraine managed to topple their government by way of prolonged protest which was in part a call for the Eastern European nation to move closer to Europe and away from Russia.
The deposed Russian-backed President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych sparked the wrath of the Ukrainians by refusing to sign a ‘trade agreement’ that would have brought Ukraine closer to the EU. Instead he preferred closer ties with Russia which is sort of creating its own ‘EU’ called the Customs Union.
This paper posits that Ukraine has been a battleground for power both between the West and Russia (external power) and that of the state versus the citizens (Internal).
The paper will try to lay bare the various power struggles that were and are at play in the Ukrainian crisis and conclude that with the West looking like having won, the power play has only begun as Russia will not allow a nation so close to it and vital to its prestige get aligned with the West, its arch-enemy.
Before the Ukraine case can be tackled, it is essential to discuss the notion of power as it occurs in the discipline of International Relations. It will also feature a summary of two prescribed course readings on Power.
INSTITUTIONS, NORMALIZATION, AND POWER Day-qi Peko
This volume is the collaborative work of the Greater Philadelphia Philosophy Consortium. It grew out of a series of conferences organized around the work of Michel Foucault that was conducted by the Consortium in 1985-86 under the title "Institutions, Normalization, and Power". Yet, while this volume had its beginnings there, almost none of the papers included here are taken from that series. Rather than issue a conference volume, we decided to cast a broader net in consortial waters, to invite a broader range of participants into a more integrated, longer-term project. The resulting volume still draws its character and range of contributions entirely from the Consortium, as we solicited those faculty of member institutions and guests of Consortium programs who work closely with Foucault and with issues raised by Foucault. The objective of the
Pinning down Power in Ukraine Crisis: West versus RussiaBright Mhango
In February 2014, the people of Ukraine managed to topple their government by way of prolonged protest which was in part a call for the Eastern European nation to move closer to Europe and away from Russia.
The deposed Russian-backed President of Ukraine Victor Yanukovych sparked the wrath of the Ukrainians by refusing to sign a ‘trade agreement’ that would have brought Ukraine closer to the EU. Instead he preferred closer ties with Russia which is sort of creating its own ‘EU’ called the Customs Union.
This paper posits that Ukraine has been a battleground for power both between the West and Russia (external power) and that of the state versus the citizens (Internal).
The paper will try to lay bare the various power struggles that were and are at play in the Ukrainian crisis and conclude that with the West looking like having won, the power play has only begun as Russia will not allow a nation so close to it and vital to its prestige get aligned with the West, its arch-enemy.
Before the Ukraine case can be tackled, it is essential to discuss the notion of power as it occurs in the discipline of International Relations. It will also feature a summary of two prescribed course readings on Power.
INSTITUTIONS, NORMALIZATION, AND POWER Day-qi Peko
This volume is the collaborative work of the Greater Philadelphia Philosophy Consortium. It grew out of a series of conferences organized around the work of Michel Foucault that was conducted by the Consortium in 1985-86 under the title "Institutions, Normalization, and Power". Yet, while this volume had its beginnings there, almost none of the papers included here are taken from that series. Rather than issue a conference volume, we decided to cast a broader net in consortial waters, to invite a broader range of participants into a more integrated, longer-term project. The resulting volume still draws its character and range of contributions entirely from the Consortium, as we solicited those faculty of member institutions and guests of Consortium programs who work closely with Foucault and with issues raised by Foucault. The objective of the
Open University DD101 TMA04 (2014) Michel FoucaultCraig Hammond
DD101 TMA04 2014 presentation on Michel Foucault in relation to the TMA question: 'Compare and contrast two social science views about the ordering of social life'
Rethinking Michel Foucault: The Political Circle of Parrhesia and DemocracySydney Democracy Network
As part of SDN's seminar series, Professor Henrik Bang (University of Canberra) indicates perspectives on Michel Foucault that can inform our understanding of democracy.
Michel Foucault has become an exemplar in the disciplines of philosophy, sociology, history, linguistics and literary criticism. Ironically, he has never made much of an impact upon the political discipline, to which he first of all belongs, and in which he deserves a prominent position as one of the best political theorists and researchers of all time. In particular in his later strings of lectures from 1978 to 1984 he develops an empirical and normative approach to studying the political as governmentality.
Open University DD101 TMA04 (2014) Michel FoucaultCraig Hammond
DD101 TMA04 2014 presentation on Michel Foucault in relation to the TMA question: 'Compare and contrast two social science views about the ordering of social life'
Rethinking Michel Foucault: The Political Circle of Parrhesia and DemocracySydney Democracy Network
As part of SDN's seminar series, Professor Henrik Bang (University of Canberra) indicates perspectives on Michel Foucault that can inform our understanding of democracy.
Michel Foucault has become an exemplar in the disciplines of philosophy, sociology, history, linguistics and literary criticism. Ironically, he has never made much of an impact upon the political discipline, to which he first of all belongs, and in which he deserves a prominent position as one of the best political theorists and researchers of all time. In particular in his later strings of lectures from 1978 to 1984 he develops an empirical and normative approach to studying the political as governmentality.
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
How to Split Bills in the Odoo 17 POS ModuleCeline George
Bills have a main role in point of sale procedure. It will help to track sales, handling payments and giving receipts to customers. Bill splitting also has an important role in POS. For example, If some friends come together for dinner and if they want to divide the bill then it is possible by POS bill splitting. This slide will show how to split bills in odoo 17 POS.
The Roman Empire A Historical Colossus.pdfkaushalkr1407
The Roman Empire, a vast and enduring power, stands as one of history's most remarkable civilizations, leaving an indelible imprint on the world. It emerged from the Roman Republic, transitioning into an imperial powerhouse under the leadership of Augustus Caesar in 27 BCE. This transformation marked the beginning of an era defined by unprecedented territorial expansion, architectural marvels, and profound cultural influence.
The empire's roots lie in the city of Rome, founded, according to legend, by Romulus in 753 BCE. Over centuries, Rome evolved from a small settlement to a formidable republic, characterized by a complex political system with elected officials and checks on power. However, internal strife, class conflicts, and military ambitions paved the way for the end of the Republic. Julius Caesar’s dictatorship and subsequent assassination in 44 BCE created a power vacuum, leading to a civil war. Octavian, later Augustus, emerged victorious, heralding the Roman Empire’s birth.
Under Augustus, the empire experienced the Pax Romana, a 200-year period of relative peace and stability. Augustus reformed the military, established efficient administrative systems, and initiated grand construction projects. The empire's borders expanded, encompassing territories from Britain to Egypt and from Spain to the Euphrates. Roman legions, renowned for their discipline and engineering prowess, secured and maintained these vast territories, building roads, fortifications, and cities that facilitated control and integration.
The Roman Empire’s society was hierarchical, with a rigid class system. At the top were the patricians, wealthy elites who held significant political power. Below them were the plebeians, free citizens with limited political influence, and the vast numbers of slaves who formed the backbone of the economy. The family unit was central, governed by the paterfamilias, the male head who held absolute authority.
Culturally, the Romans were eclectic, absorbing and adapting elements from the civilizations they encountered, particularly the Greeks. Roman art, literature, and philosophy reflected this synthesis, creating a rich cultural tapestry. Latin, the Roman language, became the lingua franca of the Western world, influencing numerous modern languages.
Roman architecture and engineering achievements were monumental. They perfected the arch, vault, and dome, constructing enduring structures like the Colosseum, Pantheon, and aqueducts. These engineering marvels not only showcased Roman ingenuity but also served practical purposes, from public entertainment to water supply.
Unit 8 - Information and Communication Technology (Paper I).pdfThiyagu K
This slides describes the basic concepts of ICT, basics of Email, Emerging Technology and Digital Initiatives in Education. This presentations aligns with the UGC Paper I syllabus.
The Art Pastor's Guide to Sabbath | Steve ThomasonSteve Thomason
What is the purpose of the Sabbath Law in the Torah. It is interesting to compare how the context of the law shifts from Exodus to Deuteronomy. Who gets to rest, and why?
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptxJheel Barad
This presentation provides a briefing on how to upload submissions and documents in Google Classroom. It was prepared as part of an orientation for new Sainik School in-service teacher trainees. As a training officer, my goal is to ensure that you are comfortable and proficient with this essential tool for managing assignments and fostering student engagement.
Instructions for Submissions thorugh G- Classroom.pptx
Politics in Sociology Memorandum.docx
1. Discussion: Politics in Sociology Memorandum
Discussion: Politics in Sociology MemorandumDiscussion: Politics in Sociology
MemorandumSOC 370 California State University Northridge Politics in Sociology
MemorandumORDER HERE FOR ORIGINAL, PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPERSThe memos need to
be complete in 5 hours with a quote from the attached reading and a brief question or
comment prompted by the quote (two pages maximum). Basically the same thing as a
reading response. Just find a quote and write your thoughts. I need it in 5 HOURS.
Discussion: Politics in Sociology Memorandumpowerfoucault__1_.pdMICHEL FOUCAULT’S
ON POWERMICHEL FOUCAULT’s understanding of power changes between his early work
oninstitutions (Madness and Civilization, The Birth of the Clinic, Discipline and Punish) and
hislater work on sexuality and governmentality. In the early work, Foucault sometimes
gives a sensethat power somehow inheres in institutions themselves rather than in the
individuals that makethose institutions function. Of course, what Foucault explores in those
books is how the creationof modern disciplines, with their principles of order and control,
tends to “disindividualize”power, making it seem as if power inheres in the prison, the
school, the factory, and so on. ThePanopticon (see previous module) becomes Foucault’s
model for the way other institutionsfunction: the Panopticon “is an important mechanism,
for it automatizes and disindividualizespower. Power has its principle not so much in a
person as in a certain concerted distribution ofbodies, surfaces, lights, gazes; in an
arrangement whose internal mechanisms produce therelation in which individuals are
caught up” (Discipline 202). Indeed, Bentham’s goal was tocreate an architectural idea that,
ultimately, could function on its own: it did not matter whoexactly operated the machine:
“Any individual, taken almost at random, can operate the machine:in the absence of the
director, his family, his friends, his visitors, even hisservants” (Discipline 202). The idea of
discipline itself similarly functions as an abstraction ofthe idea of power from any
individual: “‘Discipline’ may be identified neither with an institutionnor with an apparatus;
it is a type of power, a modality for its exercise, comprising a whole set ofinstruments,
techniques, procedures, levels of application, targets; it is a physics’ or an ‘anatomy’of
power, a technology” (Discipline 215). Bureaucracies, like disciplines, contribute to
theprocess of disindividuation since they promote the facelessness of the bureaucrat (“I’m
just doingmy job”; “I’m just a cog in the machine”) and tend to continue functioning even
after majorrevolutions. (After the fall of Nazi Germany, for example, the general
bureaucratic structure, andmost of its workers, remained in place.).The effect of this
tendency to disindividualize power is the perception that power resides inthe machine itself
2. (the “panoptic machine”; the “technology” of power) rather than in itsoperator. For this
reason, one can finish reading Foucault’s Discipline and Punish with theparanoid feeling
that we are powerless before such an effective and diffuse form of socialcontrol. Foucault
makes clear in his later work, however, that power ultimately does inhere inindividuals,
including those that are surveilled or punished. It is true that contemporary forms
ofdisciplinary organization allow ever larger number of people to be controlled by ever
smallernumbers of “specialists”; however, as Foucault explains in “The Subject and Power,”
“somethingcalled Power, with or without a capital letter, which is assumed to exist
universally in aconcentrated or diffused form, does not exist. Power exists only when it is
put into action” (219).Foucault therefore makes clear that, in itself, power “is not a
renunciation of freedom, atransference of rights, the power of each and all delegated to a
few” (220). Indeed, poweris not the same as violence because the opposite pole of violence
“can only be passivity” (220).By contrast, “a power relationship can only be articulated on
the basis of two elements which areeach indispensable if it is really to be a power
relationship: that ‘the other’ (the one over whompower is exercised) be thoroughly
recognized and maintained to the very end as a person whoacts; and that, faced with a
relationship of power, a whole field of responses, reactions, results,and possible inventions
may open up” (220). Power always entails a set of actions performedupon another persons
actions and reactions. Although violence may be a part of some powerrelationships, “In
itself the exercise of power is not violence” (220); it is “always a way of actingupon an
acting subject or acting subjects by virtue of their acting or being capable ofaction”
(220)..Foucault therefore turns in his later work to the concept of “government” in order to
explainhow power functions:Basically power is less a confrontation between two
adversaries or the linking of one tothe other than a question of government. This word must
be allowed the very broadmeaning which it had in the sixteenth century. “Government” did
not refer only topolitical structures or to the management of states; rather it designated the
way in whichthe conduct of individuals or of groups might be directed: the government of
children, ofsouls, of communities, of families, of the sick. It did not only cover the
legitimatelyconstituted forms of political or economic subjection, but also modes of action,
more orless considered and calculated, which were destined to act upon the possibilities of
actionof other people. To govern, in this sense, is to structure the possible field of action
ofothers. The relationship proper to power would not therefore be sought on the side
ofviolence or of struggle, nor on that of voluntary linking (all of which can, at best, only
bethe instruments of power), but rather in the area of the singular mode of action,
neitherwarlike nor juridical, which is government. (221).The turn to this concept of
“government” allowed Foucault to include a new element tohis understanding of power:
freedom. “Power is exercised only over free subjects, and onlyinsofar as they are free”
(221), Foucault explains. Conversely, “slavery is not a powerrelationship when man is in
chains. (In this case it is a question of a physical relationship ofconstraint.)” (221). Indeed,
recalcitrance thus becomes an integral part of the power relationship:“At the very heart of
the power relationship, and constantly provoking it, are the recalcitrance ofthe will and the
intransigence of freedom” (221-22). Foucault thus provides us with a powerfulmodel for
thinking about how to fight oppression when one sees it: “the analysis, elaboration,and
3. bringing into question of power relations and the ‘agonism’ between power relations and
theintransitivity of freedom is a permanent political task inherent in all social existence”
(223).Proper Citation of this Page:Felluga, Dino. “Modules on Foucault: On Power.”
Introductory Guide to Critical Theory.Date of last update, which you can find on the home
page. Purdue U. Date youaccessed the site. . Discussion: Politics in Sociology Memorandum