Michel Foucault discusses kinds of power and their

relations. The first of it is called sovereign power, and was

established during the time of kings and lords. This kind of
power Foucault considered as inefficient and unproductive. It
is very much power oriented, negative, and subtractive.
Although extravagant, this kind of power does not produce good
results. The second is called disciplinary power, a kind of
power in which we currently experience. It was established
during the rise of scientific institutions within the state.
Disciplinary power is very reliable and it is an apparatus of
production.
In his book discipline and punishment, Foucault
enumerated the transition of punishments and its evolution
throughout time. It is a continuous self-examination of how an
offender may be punished. From the brutal ways of punishment,
it has evolved into a kind of disciplinary action. During the
time of sovereign power, offenders are punished with much pain
and suffering that would eventually lead to the offender’s
death. The purpose of punishment is not so much as to correct
the wrong action done, but rather, a kind of show pertaining
to others and warning them of the sad and painful fate if one
commits an offense. However, punishments were eventually taken
into a conscious examination and later transforms into
different kinds and modes. Torture and death becomes too
brutal as a punishment that is why alternative punishments
were created. Although considered as punishment its aim is no
longer to inflict pain and suffering, but instead to correct.
Offenders are now given opportunities to make up for the wrong
act done, thus, correctional institutions are established such
as prison. Inside a correctional institution strict discipline
was very much strongly enforced. There is a schedule to be
followed that dictates what things to be done at respective
time on respective place. Inmates are forced to do certain
tasks whether they like it or not, a way to suppress the will
which was abused.
Prison becomes an apparatus of partitioning. Foucault
understands that a city is created in the context of
partitioning. There is a place for everything. Within an
established grid, prison if contrasted with that of a rich
subdivision is at both ends. The distinction was made to
understand that the place of prison is dangerous while that of
rich as very much safer. The value of the place becomes higher
as it offers better security and safer place. This is why a
person will feel safer in Forbes than in squatter’s area.
Partitioning was established to promote and protect one’s
lifestyle. Of course it is the underlying reason why one
should feel safe within a certain place. Taking care of one’s
lifestyle is a hard endeavor, because there are various
lifestyles in which each is trying to dominate one another.
Let’s take for example a lifestyle of a person living in
Forbes, the grandeur of being rich and powerful has its own
lifestyle and only those people who come to live together with
them are protecting the same kind of lifestyle. If for example
a squatter will try to build house within the area, it would
indeed affect the lifestyle of the community. A single
squatter will have a drastic effect among the inhabitants of a
wealthy subdivision.
Wars are fought to keep and dominate other lifestyles. I
can imagine how many times the Church was persecuted but is
still standing today. The Church’s lifestyle was one of the
few who fought its way into the world. The Church, government,
and the world of business are just some of the many who are
fighting in its own way to protect its own lifestyle
respectively.
Power is important to protect a lifestyle, without it
one’s lifestyle would only end up being absorbed in a
lifestyle that has more power. It is indeed power that
dictates what lifestyle people will adapt. Currently, because
of multimedia and internet, it becomes easy to dominate
lifestyles. Let’s take for example the phenomena of “selfie”,
a few decades back there is no such thing as selfie, even more
a name to call it. This is made possible because of the fast
development of technology which gives the birth of smart
phones, so together with the birth of social media, a new kind
of lifestyle born. New ones are being introduced into the
world within the timeframe of days. Internet and media made it
possible to monopolize the lifestyle of the world. There seems
to be a shifting of power.
It is the power of those who are in authority that can
tell what is true and meaningful. Taking into consideration
the world of science, it is from these branches of studies
that dictate today what is correct and true. The field of
psychology for example, it has become a field that holds the
power to define a person. With its methods and conclusions,
people nowadays acknowledge whatever psychology commands as
sane or insane. The same applies to other branches of study.
Given enough examination it really seems absurd that a certain
person belonging to a certain field of study will be given an
authority to define who a certain person is and tell that
person what he should be ending up putting him under a certain
label.
There are a lot of labels now which are being used
against a person, in which has a big impact to that person’s
life. The label of being criminal or ex-convict for example,
this label automatically gives a very bad impression to
someone. The reason is because by labeling someone criminal or
ex-convict, one is automatically presupposed as a bad person.
In this case, the personality of the criminal and other
aspects of his being human is being undermined by the very
label that was attributed to him. Because of this, people will
no longer give him a chance to make himself known, to give
himself a fair presentation of his goodness and capacities.
Labels can ruin a person’s life. But on the other of the coin
it can also build up a person.
Everyone who believes to the authority and power of the
Church would also believe to the people that work in it. The
Church has its own labels with regards to its faithful. There
are Pope, Cardinals, Bishops, priests, etc. Given the power
and authority of the Church, these personalities are able to
dictate the faith of the people and handle their morality.
Every hierarchy holds a certain kind of power. Let’s take for
example the label of being a seminarian. When I entered the
seminary many priest have warned us that our status of being a
seminarian would really alter the way people would look at us
just because we are seminarians. True enough after years of
staying here in the seminary, it seems that the label
seminarian holds a certain kind of influence to the people. As
they see the ideal image of a seminarian as holding a good
personality and bearing good discipline, some people treat
seminarians as somehow special, regardless if we really fit to
that ideal or not.
This has become the race in the society today; a race to
fit into a certain kind label. The varieties of labels into
which one can choose match that of the number of labels the
society offers. Labels inform the person in to what the
society imposes him to be. From childhood into being an adult,
at every point of a person’s life the society always fit him
into a certain kind of labeling. Normally the first label one
would try to achieve is the label of being a student. It is
payment to get hold of the ticket which holds the title of
having a degree. This ticket allows the person to fit into the
other labels the society offers. This is important because it
is a pre-requisite towards labels who bears more authority,
responsibility, and power. That is why in the context of
society it is impossible for an individual to hold a single
label throughout his life, because everyone undergoes the
stages of labeling of the society.
Since labels inform the individual into what the society
wants him to be, it is the society and the powerful
institutions which dictates what form the people should take.
The overwhelming objective of the forms they establish is to
create docile and obedient bodies. Every positive label that
has been created was geared towards this objective. It is what
Fr. David calls as the “yes men or compliance subjects,” every
endeavor we partake in the society would eventually make us
obedient. One studies to graduate and then after graduation
one becomes an employee, this process is a tedious practices
of obedience to the discipline each stage of institution
offers. The more obedient the citizens of the society is, the
more productive it becomes, and the more productive the
society becomes the more powerful institutions will be. Thus,
the world is composed of power and its relations.
Power relations are basically about human relationships,
because human relationships always involve a conscious effort
to control the other, thus, power seems to be always present.
This kind of power is never stable, as complex as human
relationships can be so as power relations. Let’s take for
example power relations between families, the role of a father
within the context of the family of course allows him to bear
more power with regard to the other members of his own family,
same goes with the mother. And then there also the hierarchy
of the siblings, the older one gets to have more power over
the younger ones. However, since this kind of power is
considered as never stable, power relations within the family
will eventually change. What I mean is that there are certain
factors that will have an effect to these power relations. For
example, if a family is poor any sibling who will be able to
earn money and will provide better support to make the life of
the family easier would indeed alter the power relation. Since
that sibling who was able to provide more, other members of
the family would tend to follow his orders and there will be
changes of priorities. The given example only covers that of
power relations within a family, however, human relationships
is not contained within a family, a father may also become an
employee whenever he is at work, or an point guard whenever he
is playing basketball, all these involves power relations.
It is an important presupposition that power relations
exist because there is freedom. Foucault understands that
without freedom there can never be power relations, it is best
explained within the context of domination. A tyrant ruler has
the full authority and power over his citizen, in this case
there can never be any power relations because the citizens
under tyrannical governance is not free. Freedom involves a
choice, and within tyranny choice is what citizens do not
have. Same goes with the slaves, the relationship between
master and slave does not involve any power relation, because
slaves are never free, all they do is to accomplish the
bidding of their master. So for Foucault, power relations
happen only if human relations have a certain degrees of
freedom.
According to Foucault during the time of Socrates, they
understand that it is important that each individual knows how
to take care of himself. Taking care of one’s self here means
to control one’s own desires and tendencies. So in today’s
context a person who does not know how to control his desire
for sensual pleasure and continues to heed its temptation is
not taking care of himself. Failure to take care one’s self
engenders the risk of domination and as already said it
removes power relations. Whenever an individual or social
group was able to freeze power relations, a state of
domination comes into play. Thus, it is important to have
self-knowledge or introspection. This allows an individual to
transcend from his own insatiable number of desires, and in
turn will be able to control power successfully. Successfully
taking care of one’s self is a healthy way to participate in
power relations, because by taking care of one’s self, one is
also indirectly taking care of other people. Let’s take the
relationship between a husband and wife in the context of
conjugal act. Normally it is the husband’s initiative whenever
it happens, that is because wives almost always simply submit
to their husbands. A husband, who, in the context of Foucault,
does not know how to take care of himself and is a slave of
his passion and desires, will always be heeding its calls
regardless if the wife wants it or not. If this is the case,
the wife is no longer seen as a subject having free will and
dignity, but rather, she is seen as an object of the husband’s
insatiable pleasure. In this manner where the wife no longer
has freedom to reject husband’s request, she is no longer
free, thus, power relations is no longer existing and there
comes a kind of domination of the husband to his wife.
Power relations is analogical to a bar swing. In a swing
to be properly used there should be individuals at both ends,
and each having its own roles to play. As one end goes up, the
other has to go down. Power relations is like this, although
each holds a certain kind of power, it is necessary that power
is not too strong nor to weak, because if it is too strong
then it tends towards domination, on the other hand if it is
too weak, then it would eventually lead to slavery. Power
relations should always involve complementing each other’s
relationships, instead of holding each other in the neck.
Indeed power is cannot but be measured in human relationships.
Even in the context of classroom there will always be a system
to measure power, students are always ranked according to
their performance during examinations, thus the system of
honors.
Domination and slavery has taken its many forms
throughout the history of mankind. I cannot but include the
killing of thousands of Jews by the Germans headed by Hitler
during the Second World War. The harsh racism of the Americans
towards black people should also be noted, the time when white
Americans treated the blacks as slaves. The world has become
aware to these extreme cases of uncontrolled power, thus,
mankind created ways to prevent history from repeating itself.
However, with today’s classification of what is true and as
how it was promulgated, there seems to be some blockages of
power.
These so called blockages of power are what define the
truth today, which are mostly embodied by social sciences and
institutions. Although power relationship in sense is still
possible, domination of truth is what is meant by blockages of
power. Most of the time, people are unaware of the
monopolization of the truth by social sciences. Let’s take for
example great masturbation panic during the 19th century. There
was a purification movement created to cause panic. A great
threat was made to adolescences who continue to practice
masturbation. The scare is composed of information threatening
the teenager to be useless and unproductive if the practice is
to continue. Of course the panic affected the parents to a
great degree that they almost naturally acceded to it.
Although partly true, the underlying fact about the supposed
threat was to make the adolescence more useful to the society.
Seen as normal before the great panic, masturbation is now
seen in sense as something unhealthy and destructive of a
child’s life.
With careful examination it seems that the world today is
being played by the game of truth. Foucault understands this
game as a set of rules by which truth is produced. Given the
case about the game of truth, then how can one successfully
take care of himself if the truth that there is, is being
controlled or manipulated?
 An example is in Foucault’s History of Sexuality and The
Use of Pleasure, here he stresses how sexuality was repressed
and controlled. Because of these blockages of power, sex and
everything that goes on about it becomes imprisoned within the
confines of the bedroom of a husband and wife. No longer was
sexuality discussed.
Given this kind of environment, sexuality as it was
enclosed within the bedroom, then, to talk about it becomes in
a sense immoral and perverted. People who are caught telling
stories of their fantasies and hidden desire was then labeled
as perverts. Perverts according to the medical society is a
kind of disorder of the mind and are immoral, of course this
label becomes part of the game of truth to further solidify
the intent to keep sex within the confines of the bedroom.
Perversion is just one of the results of enclosing sexuality
within the confines of bedroom, more strict the authority at
preventing these so called pleasurable fantasies at expressing
itself, the more will the people try to find a way to express
it.
At first these hidden desires and fantasies had its
outlets during confession, it is where everything can be
revealed and is assured of its secrecy. Still, confession is
not enough as an outlet, thus, people tried to find different
ways of expressing it. Let us take the concept of obligatory
heterosexuality for example which removes homosexuality out of
the picture. What I mean by homosexuality here are those
persons or people who want to engage in a romantic or even
sexual relationship with the same sex. Historically, during
the time of ancient Greece, it is normal for men to desire the
same sex. Plato’s book involves Socrates desiring the beauty
and youth of young men. According to Foucault, at that time,
the Greeks desiring the same sex was considered as normal.
What was the concern of the people at that time regarding
relationships is not that one desires the same sex, instead,
the concern tackle those of status and age; the old men
desiring a young boy or two old men having an intimate
relationship. It is also a fact that young boys agree to this
relationship because it entails education and a chance to get
a higher status within the society.
Taking the context of the ancient Greeks in contrast with
how society thinks of it today. Medical society has given it a
name as homosexuals, all the more the idea of having romantic
relation with the same sex is now considered by the medical
society as sickness, a kind of disorder. The labels of
homosexuals, gay, and lesbians are taken into context as
discriminatory. This breeds contempt for homosexuals.
Eventually homosexuals find a hard time to fit in, thus, they
try to blend in and pretend that they are the same as
everybody else.
It seems that homosexuals will not have chance to take
care of themselves properly as long as society treats them as
something not normal or even worse as sick. As stated, not
taking care of one’s self is not to control one’s passions and
desires. If this continues, homosexuals’ inability to take
care of themselves will lead them to dominate others. It is a
fact that some of the greatest personalities in the world of
media today are homosexuals.
I think although society is suppressing homosexuals,
because of post-modernity, they made a way to self-expression
and make people accept them; to let people know that they are
just like everyone else, normal. There is an American show
entitled modern family and it shows a rather unfamiliar kind
of family because it is composed of a married gay men and
their adopted daughter. I think it is true now in America and
sooner or later mankind will redefine its understanding of
what a family is should really be composed of.