To this end, he developed the concept of "bio power," which permeates every aspect of life with the aim of enhancing, developing, and preserving it, as an alternative to sovereign power, which is concentrated in the hands of a single authority that exercises domination and death. This bio power evolved into disciplinary power, concerned with populations as social bodies subject to surveillance, regulation, and improvement, ultimately bringing all aspects of life under its strategic control, where politics and life become intertwined. In contrast, Giorgio Agamben employs the concept of "bio politics" differently, presenting it as "politics of death," where the production of "bare life" exposes individuals to violence, exclusion, and death. Both Foucault and Agamben, however, overlook religious and ethical frameworks in their analyses, which represents a fundamental gap: power without ethical reference can legitimize injustice under the guise of "organizing life." Moreover, their theories, particularly Agamben’s, tend to equate the practices of democratic and authoritarian regimes.
, , , , .
Comments