In examining how the modern state governs, the works of French philosophers Michel Foucault and Louis Althusser offer valuable insights. Despite their methodological differences, a comprehensive understanding of the intricate dynamics between state power, citizen behavior, and societal norms can be gleaned by studying both philosophers in conjunction. Foucault’s concept of governmentality elucidates that state control transcends traditional mechanisms like the police, courts, and prisons. Rather, modern governance extends its reach into shaping individuals’ thoughts, behaviors, self-regulation, and civic responsibilities. Power manifests not only through overt control but also through influencing education, healthcare, data analysis, security measures, infrastructure development, and civic engagement. The state doesn’t just impose external control; it actively fosters a sense of “good citizenship” and encourages productivity among individuals. Governance, therefore, is not solely about instilling fear of punishment but about cultivating norms of societal conduct.
Althusser delves into the apparatuses that facilitate the state’s construction of such governing conditions, categorizing them into repressive state apparatuses (RSAs) and ideological state apparatuses (ISAs). While RSAs like the police, military, judiciary, and correctional facilities operate through direct coercion, ISAs encompass entities such as family units, educational institutions, religious bodies, media outlets, cultural platforms, and intellectual spheres. Unlike RSAs, ISAs don’t enforce control through repression but instead mold individuals’ beliefs, values, ethics, and common perceptions. The synergy between RSAs and ISAs exemplifies how the state exercises governance through a blend of coercive power and the cultivation of compliant subjects.
It is essential to clarify a nuanced perspective that the state is not intrinsically malevolent. While states can suppress freedoms and rights, they also serve as vehicles for public welfare. Protecting public health, ensuring education accessibility, upholding security, safeguarding rights, delivering justice, and fostering civic dignity are challenging without institutional frameworks. In the absence of robust institutions, the society would be left vulnerable to individual whims, partisan interests, and public unrest, none of which can sustain a stable social order.
Recent encounters, such as a conversation with an Uber driver in Dhaka, shed light on prevalent attitudes towards governance and social order. The notion that only public punishment can rectify societal issues reflects a troubling trend where immediate retribution is favored over legal frameworks, urban planning, training, or institutional reforms. Similarly, discussions around public punishment for alleged offenses like rape reveal a shifting perception of justice, sidelining legal processes, evidence-based investigations, and due diligence in favor of swift public retribution.
A deeper examination of Bangladesh’s political landscape since 2014 underscores the toxic environment that has eroded the foundations of governance. The polarizing events of 2013-2014, the electoral system crisis, the suppression of opposition voices, the politicization of state institutions, media censorship, and the instrumentalization of legal apparatuses have exacerbated societal divisions. As trust in state institutions waned, the population began losing faith in the efficacy of legal mechanisms, law enforcement agencies, and the media. A growing sentiment emerged that justice could only be achieved through extrajudicial means, eroding the fundamental principles of governance.
The pervasive breakdown of governmentality is evident in the proliferation of mob-like behavior on social media platforms, where professionals from various fields engage in unethical conduct and incite vigilante actions. The loss of distinction between legitimate criticism and mob justice underscores a broader societal trend towards circumventing institutional channels for conflict resolution and justice dispensation.
Restoring governmentality is imperative to curb the rising influence of mob culture. Merely relying on police interventions, legal proceedings, or political rhetoric is insufficient. Rebuilding civic trust necessitates a concerted effort to transform law enforcement agencies into protectors, streamline judicial processes for credibility, depoliticize media narratives, and foster a culture of rights, responsibility, and due process across educational and cultural spheres. Upholding the rule of law isn’t solely about apprehending wrongdoers but about nurturing a society where justice delivery isn’t outsourced to the masses.
The erosion of institutional legitimacy and the proliferation of vigilante justice underscore a dire need for political reforms that reestablish faith in governance structures and promote civic responsibility. Rebuilding trust in institutions and upholding the rule of law are paramount to mitigating the culture of violence that has permeated society. Efforts to renew civic trust and restore institutional integrity are crucial steps towards fostering a more stable and just social order.
