Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State: Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

Abstract

It is well known that Michel Foucault challenged the centrality of the state, advancing a view of the state as ‘decentered’. He said: “The state has no heart, as we well know, but not just in the sense that it has no feelings, either good or bad, but it has no heart in the sense that it has no interior” (Foucault, 2008: 90). In the stream of scholarship inspired by Foucault it has become an interpretative orthodoxy that the state should be viewed as decentered, without a unifying center, resting upon networks of mobile power relations. In this way, political decision making is delocalized, and sovereignty is dissolved in dispersed and mundane practices. Here, I wish to examine the three routes by which Foucault during the 1970s reached his renowned ‘decentered’ approach to the state. These routes never arrived at any ultimate conception of the state, since they were experimental explorations of different perspectives on the state and state-power. They offer, I suggest, distinct analytical frameworks for contemporary analysis of state-formation, nationalism, territoriality and crises of the state.
It is well known that Michel Foucault challenged the centrality of the state, advancing a view of the state as ‘decentered’. He said: “The state has no heart, as we well know, but not just in the sense that it has no feelings, either good or bad, but it has no heart in the sense that it has no interior” (Foucault, 2008: 90). In the stream of scholarship inspired by Foucault it has become an interpretative orthodoxy that the state should be viewed as decentered, without a unifying center, resting upon networks of mobile power relations. In this way, political decision making is delocalized, and sovereignty is dissolved in dispersed and mundane practices. Here, I wish to examine the three routes by which Foucault during the 1970s reached his renowned ‘decentered’ approach to the state. These routes never arrived at any ultimate conception of the state, since they were experimental explorations of different perspectives on the state and state-power. They offer, I suggest, distinct analytical frameworks for contemporary analysis of state-formation, nationalism, territoriality and crises of the state.

Seminar

SeminarGénéalogies de l’État, avec et après Foucault
LocationThe American University of Paris
CountryFrance
CityParis
Period29/09/201729/09/2017
SponsorThe American University of Paris
Internet address

Bibliographical note

CBS Library does not have access to the material

Cite this

Villadsen, K. (2017). Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State: Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies. Paper presented at Généalogies de l’État, avec et après Foucault, Paris, France.
Villadsen, Kaspar. / Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State : Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies. Paper presented at Généalogies de l’État, avec et après Foucault, Paris, France.13 p.
@conference{7018c3865cea43fcb63d4bdc7023cc01,
title = "Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State: Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies",
abstract = "It is well known that Michel Foucault challenged the centrality of the state, advancing a view of the state as ‘decentered’. He said: “The state has no heart, as we well know, but not just in the sense that it has no feelings, either good or bad, but it has no heart in the sense that it has no interior” (Foucault, 2008: 90). In the stream of scholarship inspired by Foucault it has become an interpretative orthodoxy that the state should be viewed as decentered, without a unifying center, resting upon networks of mobile power relations. In this way, political decision making is delocalized, and sovereignty is dissolved in dispersed and mundane practices. Here, I wish to examine the three routes by which Foucault during the 1970s reached his renowned ‘decentered’ approach to the state. These routes never arrived at any ultimate conception of the state, since they were experimental explorations of different perspectives on the state and state-power. They offer, I suggest, distinct analytical frameworks for contemporary analysis of state-formation, nationalism, territoriality and crises of the state.",
author = "Kaspar Villadsen",
note = "CBS Library does not have access to the material; null ; Conference date: 29-09-2017 Through 29-09-2017",
year = "2017",
language = "English",
url = "https://foucaultetat.sciencesconf.org/",

}

Villadsen, K 2017, 'Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State: Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies' Paper presented at, Paris, France, 29/09/2017 - 29/09/2017, .

Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State : Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies. / Villadsen, Kaspar.

2017. Paper presented at Généalogies de l’État, avec et après Foucault, Paris, France.

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaperResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State

T2 - Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies

AU - Villadsen,Kaspar

N1 - CBS Library does not have access to the material

PY - 2017

Y1 - 2017

N2 - It is well known that Michel Foucault challenged the centrality of the state, advancing a view of the state as ‘decentered’. He said: “The state has no heart, as we well know, but not just in the sense that it has no feelings, either good or bad, but it has no heart in the sense that it has no interior” (Foucault, 2008: 90). In the stream of scholarship inspired by Foucault it has become an interpretative orthodoxy that the state should be viewed as decentered, without a unifying center, resting upon networks of mobile power relations. In this way, political decision making is delocalized, and sovereignty is dissolved in dispersed and mundane practices. Here, I wish to examine the three routes by which Foucault during the 1970s reached his renowned ‘decentered’ approach to the state. These routes never arrived at any ultimate conception of the state, since they were experimental explorations of different perspectives on the state and state-power. They offer, I suggest, distinct analytical frameworks for contemporary analysis of state-formation, nationalism, territoriality and crises of the state.

AB - It is well known that Michel Foucault challenged the centrality of the state, advancing a view of the state as ‘decentered’. He said: “The state has no heart, as we well know, but not just in the sense that it has no feelings, either good or bad, but it has no heart in the sense that it has no interior” (Foucault, 2008: 90). In the stream of scholarship inspired by Foucault it has become an interpretative orthodoxy that the state should be viewed as decentered, without a unifying center, resting upon networks of mobile power relations. In this way, political decision making is delocalized, and sovereignty is dissolved in dispersed and mundane practices. Here, I wish to examine the three routes by which Foucault during the 1970s reached his renowned ‘decentered’ approach to the state. These routes never arrived at any ultimate conception of the state, since they were experimental explorations of different perspectives on the state and state-power. They offer, I suggest, distinct analytical frameworks for contemporary analysis of state-formation, nationalism, territoriality and crises of the state.

M3 - Paper

ER -

Villadsen K. Foucault's Three Ways of Decentering the State: Potentials for Contemporary Political Studies. 2017. Paper presented at Généalogies de l’État, avec et après Foucault, Paris, France.