Table of Contents
- Necropolitics
- Key Aspects of Necropolitics:
- Explanation through Examples:
- State Control Over Life and Death
- Systemic Neglect and Marginalization
- Social and Cultural Implications
- Government Cover-Up and Accountability
- Poll
- Think!
- Essay / Research Possibilties
- Further Reading
The UK infected blood scandal, detailed in a 2,527-page public inquiry report, revealed that thousands of patients were knowingly exposed to contaminated blood products between 1970 and 1991, leading to over 3,000 deaths and widespread suffering from HIV and hepatitis C infections. The inquiry found that this tragedy was not an accident but a result of systemic, collective, and individual failures by successive governments, the NHS, and the medical profession, which prioritized economic and political interests over patient safety. The report criticized the government’s slow response, lack of transparency, and inadequate support for victims, calling for a formal apology, compensation, and systemic changes to prevent such a disaster from recurring. This article looks at the relationship between this scandal and the concept of necropolitics.
Necropolitics
Necropolitics, a concept developed by philosopher and political theorist Achille Mbembe, refers to the power and capacity of a state or authority to dictate how some people may live and how some must die. It extends Michel Foucault’s notions of biopolitics and biopower, which focus on the governance of life and populations, to include the politics of death and the systematic control over mortality.
Key Aspects of Necropolitics:
State Sovereignty and Power Over Life and Death:
Necropolitics emphasizes that the ultimate expression of sovereignty resides in the power to dictate who may live and who must die. This power is not merely about the capacity to kill but about structuring social and political spaces to create conditions where certain groups are exposed to death.
Spaces of Death:
Mbembe discusses “death-worlds,” or spaces where the living conditions are so dire that individuals are effectively consigned to death. These can include war zones, ghettos, refugee camps, and areas of extreme marginalization where the state exerts minimal control but maintains the ability to impose death.
Colonial and Postcolonial Contexts:
Necropolitics has roots in colonial practices where colonial powers exercised control over colonized populations, often through extreme violence, enslavement, and the imposition of death. In the postcolonial context, this logic continues in the ways states manage subjugated or marginalized populations.
Biopolitics vs. Necropolitics:
While biopolitics focuses on the administration of life, health, and the optimization of populations, necropolitics shifts the focus to the ways power operates through death. It examines how the state makes decisions about which lives are considered valuable and worth protecting, and which lives are expendable.
Contemporary Applications:
In modern contexts, necropolitics can be seen in practices like systemic racism, mass incarceration, the handling of refugee crises, state neglect in public health (e.g., during pandemics), and economic policies that lead to extreme poverty and social exclusion.
