In The Birth of Biopolitics, Foucault describes a transition from a form of government oriented toward justice—however justice is defined by the sovereign—to one based
At the heart of all disciplinary systems functions a small penal mechanism. It enjoys a kind of judicial privilege with its own laws, its specific offences, its particular forms of judgement. The disciplines established an ‘infra-penality’; they partitioned an area that the laws had left empty; they defined and repressed a mass of behaviour that the relative indifference of the great systems of punishment had allowed to escape. ‘ [. . .] The workshop, the school, the army were subject to a whole micro-penality of time (latenesses, absences, interruptions of tasks), of activity (inattention, negligence, lack of zeal), of behaviour
(impoliteness, disobedience), of speech (idle chatter, insolence), of the body (‘incorrect’ attitudes, irregular gestures, lack of cleanliness), of sexuality (impurity, indecency).
The public figure is a product of the mass media system. Luhmann said that everything we know about the world comes from the mass media, which includes books, newspapers, etc., not just electronic media.
In “The semantics of twenty-first century socialism and the Venezuelan political system,” José Javier Blanco Rivero writes The French philosopher [Claude Lefort] explains that in the
This idea—that the difference between law and politics is a difference in language—lies at the heart of Niklas Luhmann’s systems theory. Luhmann suggested that society must be understood as a communication system. As such, it is differentiated into different subsystems, among them the political system and the legal system, but also, for example, the religious system, the scientific system, and so on.
Here is a poll that shows that the political system is not so tightly coupled with the religion system. Just 25 percent of Americans say