Chapter 20 The Politics of Life Itself

There is so much information to digest in these few pages so I will give it my best to try to cover it. Nikolas Rose sums up the whole chapter as for once "our very biological life itself has entered the domain of decision and choice...We have entered the age of vital politics, of biological ethics and genetic responsibility." In the past it used to be survival of the fittest, then starting in the 18th century according to Rose, political authorities took on the task of managing life in the name of well being "of the population as a vital order and of each of its living subjects." Politics now address the process of human existence concerning the size and quality of population, human sexuality, reproduction, life and death.

Type rest of the post here Biopolitics came with the rise of life sciences and clinical medicine involving new techniques and modern technologies for the care of people through modern health services. Rose points out that in the 20th century state organized tactics played a part in biological politics concerning modification of reproductive decisions in the name of health of the population. There will probably be a whole lot more involvement with Biopolitics with women being able to presently have a litter of babies and the moral and ethical responsibility behind it. Rose says "however great the moral and political distance between the euthanasia, compulsory sterilization and genetic counseling, we cannot simply counter pose positive to negative policies, voluntary to compulsory measures, coercion and persuasion." I believe he is saying that just because there is a controversy issue on these things we cannot impose or do anything about it. (Not sure though). The first half of the century ws easy for biopolitics because health was understood as fit, and fit people were more disirable than unhealthy people. It was the Governments job to make sure its population stayed healthy and took measures through policies. Vaccinations come to my mind among other policies. Things have changed according to Rose - 'the political rationalities of our preset are no longer inspired by the dream of the takig in charge of the lives of each in the name of the destiny of all.' Now there is an array of identity politics and cultures to deal with. People are expected to take care of their own health. The state does not give up total control though. They are still regulating the sale of foodstuffs and making sure the water is pure and fluoride is added to water for public health. What the state is willing to give up is that individuals are to become active partners in their own health and well being. Now there are all kinds of self help groups, medicines as well as alternative medicines, public and private health insurances to help with all of it. Rose spends a lot of time on genetic health. We can change the old normal and have a new normal through genetics. We can do in vitro fertilization, stem cell reproduction and repair of almost any part of the body by playing with DNA. We can cut, suck, lift and fill any part of us to make us look better, and also shorten sickness, and prevent premature death. Psychiatry can manipulate and improve personalities using bio medicine. Rose says that with original biopolitical theses there was an implied separation between those in power and the subjects such as the "medical experimentation on prisoners and psychiatric inmates, euthanasia of those whose lives are not worth living, even such benign strategies as medical inspeciotn of schoolchildren". He says now there are new strategies of advertising and "marketing in the rapidly developing consumer market for health". This makes me think of the commercials that tell you to ask your doctor about a prescription medication being right for you. Biopolitics merges here to what Rose terms "ethopolitics", the politics of life itself. He says dicipline equals individualizes and normalizes, biopower equals collectivizes and socializes, and ethopolitics equals self-techniques - humans to make themselves better than they are, "disputes over the value to be accorded to life itself: quality of life, right to life, or the right to choose, euthanasia, gene therapy, human cloning and the like." There is a new responsibility and choices that come with the new bio techno age. rose says that "individuals seem to have acquired a kind of biological citizenship"...and that this argument would suggest that "biological ethics ascribes each human life equal worth. But our practices and techniques show us that the biological lives of individual human beings are recurrently subject to judgments of worth." I don't know why Terri Schiavo came to mind at this time. Maybe it was because while judgment was being made of her worth to live, she took forever to die. Rose ends with "For once our very biological life itself has entered the domain of decision and choice...We have entered the age of vital politics, of biological ethics and genetic responsibility." Personally, I am glad to see all of the change that is going on in the field of medicine and look forward to seeing how it progresses.