Post Yapısalcı Teori Bağlamında Post-Panoptik Gözetimin Küresel Politikası
Bu makalenin amacı, yakın dönem gözetim literatürü içerisinde geliştirilen argümanların küresel bağlamını post yapısalcı kuramlar üzerinden tartışmaktır. Makalede öncelikle post yapısalcı kuramın neden günümüz küresel dünyasında devlet refleksini kavramak için uygun bir araç olabileceği tartışılacaktır. Ardından, post panoptik gözetim teknolojileri ve politikalarının incelenmesi yapılacaktır. Son olarak makale, günümüz post panoptik gözetim teknikleri uygulayan bir devlet modelinin post yapısalcı analizine dair önermeler sunacaktır. Makalenin esas amacı, post panoptik gözetim teknikleri aracılığı ile devlet kuramına ilişkin özgün bir bakış açısı geliştirmektir. Post panoptik gözetim aygıtları ve uygulamaları, daha akışkan ve hareketli bir iktidarın işleyiş unsurlarını oluşturmaktadır. Bu nedenle, gözetim iktidarındaki değişim ve dönüşüm, öncelikle iktidar ilişkilerindeki dönüşümleri kapsayacak biçimde tartışmaya açılmalıdır. Post yapısalcılığın bir devlet kuramı olarak tartışılmasının temelinde, küresel boyutta meydana gelen bir olgu yatmaktadır. Bu olgunun temelinde, gözetim uygulamalarının sınır ve mekan aşımı bulunmaktadır. Yeni gözetim uygulamalarının nesneyi her yerde izleyebilme yeteneği, gözetimin küresel ve olumsal vasfını ortaya koymaktadır.
Global Politics of Post-Panoptic Surveillance in the Context of Post-Structuralist Theory
The aim of this article is to discuss the global context of the arguments developed in the recent surveillance literature through post-structuralist theories. First, an argument is made that the post-structuralist theory can serve as a tool for understanding the state reflex in today’s global world. Then, the post-panoptic surveillance technologies and politics are examined. Finally, the article presents suggestions for post-structural analyses of a state performing post-panoptic surveillance techniques. The main goal of the article is to compose an original perspective on state theory through post-panoptic surveillance techniques. Post-panoptic surveillance devices and applications constitute elements for the functioning of a more fluid and active government. For this reason, the change and transformation of the power of surveillance must first be debated to include transformations in power relations. At the base of the discussion is poststructuralism as a theory of the state, a phenomenon that lies in the global dimension. On the basis of this phenomenon, some new surveillance practices surpass borders and spaces as well. For this reason, the ability of new surveillance applications to monitor objects everywhere reveals the global and contingent nature of surveillance.
The close relation between surveillance power and the modern state has exceeded in today’s post-modern global world. Panopticon as a modern surveillance technique is a projection of the modern state based on territorial domination, but it does not have any theoretical answers for the ways in which a global power that transcends borders functions. For this reason, a theoretical discussion focusing on the present condition of state theory is inevitable and is this study’s purpose. According to the basic claim of this study, transformations in surveillance techniques that are functional in today’s global world require a fundamental change in state theory. Just as modern state theory can be traced through panopticon, a modern surveillance technique, contemporary postmodern state theory can similarly be explained based on present surveillance techniques that are called “post-panopticon.”
Post-panopticon is a very new level that surpasses panopticon, a power technique that is identified with Foucault in surveillance literature. According to this, the power of surveillance is no longer spatial but is a network-power model that transcends spaces. Panopticon, based on the claim of territorial sovereignty of the modern state, reflects the spatial setup of surveillance power. This “spatial power,” which is highly prevalent in Foucault, is based on the idea of “enclosed spaces” in the functioning of modern power. “Enclosed space” is a phenomenon that gives concrete content to power while working through dualities. This model of surveillance power, which Foucault observes in prisons, barracks, hospitals, clinics, etc., resembles that of the territorial sovereignty of the modern state because the modern state itself is based on the idea of establishing a certain isolated space while establishing its sovereignty. The territorial sovereignty of the modern state manifests itself by dividing the boundary into two parts, internal and external. And this sovereignty depends on specific surveillance and control techniques which are processed by state in order to perpetuate the division between interior and exterior. For this reason, an important similarity exists between the panopticon based on spatial observation and the modern state established in the center of sovereignty and based on territorial separation.
What happens when we place this theoretical partnership in today’s global world? Since the purpose of this study is to address this, it aims to debate the transformation in state theory relationally and functionally at a bilateral level. In other words, the basic claim of this study is that state theory cannot be understood in a normative context alone. For this reason, in this study, a roadmap is sought to conceptualize the theory of state in a functional context and, therefore, some suggestions are made. First, the theoretical plane of trying to position state theory in today’s world is carried out with the explanation of post-structuralist arguments. In today’s global world, where the modern theory of the state is exceeded the functional scope of power of the state has become more ambiguous. The very reason for this argumentation depends on a reality that implies that the state has been transformed from being a predictable territorial sovereign to being a more contingent sovereign. For this reason, we need to do away with modern assumptions about the state at the theoretical level.
This is exactly where post-structuralist theories can help us comprehend the transformations of the state in both the functional and theoretical context. The reason is that the post-structuralist theory emphasizes the perpetual and endless contexts of power relations. That is why it can create a suitable way of realizing the contingent functioning of the state in the new global era. The post-panoptic nature of today’s surveillance techniques is more contingent, flexible, and “normalized” than the panoptic techniques. We can see the differences between panopticon and post-panopticon in the functioning process. For example, unlike panopticon, postpanopticon forms surveillance relations in a context that transcends space. Thus, anything could become an object of surveillance power. Second, contemporary postpanoptic surveillance techniques dissolve the fact of “frontiers” so that boundaries separating states from one another are shifted from a territorial to a relational concept. A distinction exists in a state model that is based on territorial sovereignty when the states are considered to have transcendental monitoring capabilities. In this new state model, the function of surveillance is ambiguous and borderless. For this reason, transformations in the sovereignty of the state, which is the main subject of the surveillance, should be considered. As a result, this study aims to discuss the transformations in state sovereignty at the center of the changes and transformations in surveillance, which is a specific instrument of power. However, the most important part is that the turning of the state into a more contingent power requires the examination of state theory in a post-structural context because this offers more efficient theoretical tools to conceptualize both the contingent and ambiguous dimensions of contemporary power relations that are the functions of the state.
