Africa’s response to COVID-19: a governmentality in disguise masterclass?

Webster Chakawata
{"title":"Africa’s response to COVID-19: a governmentality in disguise masterclass?","authors":"Webster Chakawata","doi":"10.1080/03906701.2022.2028403","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT At the risk of oversimplification, virtually all research that scrutinizes COVID-19 is propelled by identical points of departures which chief in their assessment, portray how the pandemic accentuates the likelihood of illiberal or autocratic regimes tightening restrictions upon civil liberties. This paper is no different as it is predicated along this initial starting point but is also carrying an ambition to bring to light how the pandemic context, perhaps counterintuitively has also provided authoritarian governments with the platform to uptake provisions that bring about a veneer of civil rights and the potential which this vacillation between increasingly authoritarian and considerably liberal approaches in handling the virus generates. This paper is offset by Foucault’s theorizing on Governmentality and illuminates on how African governments have responded to the virus in the textbook manner Foucault envisages. In so doing, it challenges the generally advanced idea that Governmentality is only applicable in Western liberal contexts by looking at African countries response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has enlisted classic Governmentality techniques such as disciplinary power, surveillance and power/knowledge monopoly by African states.","PeriodicalId":46079,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Sociology-Revue Internationale de Sociologie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Sociology-Revue Internationale de Sociologie","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2022.2028403","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ABSTRACT At the risk of oversimplification, virtually all research that scrutinizes COVID-19 is propelled by identical points of departures which chief in their assessment, portray how the pandemic accentuates the likelihood of illiberal or autocratic regimes tightening restrictions upon civil liberties. This paper is no different as it is predicated along this initial starting point but is also carrying an ambition to bring to light how the pandemic context, perhaps counterintuitively has also provided authoritarian governments with the platform to uptake provisions that bring about a veneer of civil rights and the potential which this vacillation between increasingly authoritarian and considerably liberal approaches in handling the virus generates. This paper is offset by Foucault’s theorizing on Governmentality and illuminates on how African governments have responded to the virus in the textbook manner Foucault envisages. In so doing, it challenges the generally advanced idea that Governmentality is only applicable in Western liberal contexts by looking at African countries response to the COVID-19 pandemic that has enlisted classic Governmentality techniques such as disciplinary power, surveillance and power/knowledge monopoly by African states.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
非洲应对COVID-19:变相治理大师班?
尽管存在过度简化的风险,但几乎所有审查COVID-19的研究都是由相同的出发点推动的,这些出发点在评估中主要描述了这场大流行如何加剧了狭隘或专制政权收紧对公民自由限制的可能性。这篇论文也没有什么不同,因为它是沿着这个最初的起点进行预测的,但也有一个雄心壮志,即揭示大流行的背景如何,也许与直觉相反,也为威权政府提供了一个平台,让他们能够接受一些条款,这些条款带来了公民权利的外衣,以及这种在日益专制和相当自由的处理病毒的方法之间摇摆不定的潜力。这篇论文被福柯关于治理的理论所抵消,并阐明了非洲政府是如何以福柯设想的教科书方式应对病毒的。在这样做的过程中,它通过观察非洲国家对COVID-19大流行的反应,挑战了普遍先进的观点,即治理只适用于西方自由主义背景,这些国家采用了经典的治理技术,如非洲国家的纪律权力、监督和权力/知识垄断。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
6.70%
发文量
30
期刊介绍: International Review of Sociology is the oldest journal in the field of sociology, founded in 1893 by Ren Worms. Now the property of Rome University, its direction has been entrusted to the Faculty of Statistics. This choice is a deliberate one and falls into line with the traditional orientation of the journal as well as of the Institut International de Sociologie. The latter was the world"s first international academic organisation of sociology which started as an association of contributors to International Review of Sociology. Entrusting the journal to the Faculty of Statistics reinforces the view that sociology is not conceived apart from economics, history, demography, anthropology and social psychology.
期刊最新文献
Urban vernacular landscapes: toward a visual pedagogy of the ordinary ‘I say it’s spinach, and I say the hell with it’: an exploratory study of the single-panel cartoon and the comic mode in society From social integration to social emplacement: perspectives from Italian rural areas Social construction of places as meaningful objects: a symbolic interactionist approach Divided we stand, united we fall? Structure and struggles of contemporary German sociology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1