This article contributes to governmentality studies and state theory by discussing how to understand the centrality and importance of the state from a governmentality perspective. It uses Giorgio Agamben’s critique of Michel Foucault’s governmentality approach as a point of departure for re-investigating Foucault as a thinker of the state. It focuses on Foucault’s notion of the state as a process of ‘statification’ which emphasizes the state as something constantly produced and reproduced by processes and practices of government, administration and acclamation. As a result of this, the state appears as a given entity which is necessary for the multiplicity of governmental technologies and practices in modern society to function. Only by reference to the state can governmental practices be effective and legitimized. Finally, the article conceptualizes the centrality of the state through Foucault’s (preliminary) notions of the state as a ‘practico-reflexive prism’ and a ‘principle of intelligibility’.

This version of the article has been accepted for publication and undergone full peer review but has not been through the copyediting, typesetting, pagination and proofreading process, which may lead to differences between this version and the publisher's final version AKA Version of Record.

No abstract

Michel Foucault (1926-84) is one of the most read, cited, discussed, and quoted thinkers of the 20 th century and his work extends into a number of disciplines such as sociology, social science, political science, art studies, cultural studies, history, philosophy, the history of ideas, and many, many more. In this process Foucault's work has been extended and adapted to a number of fields, and many of his concepts have in many ways come to live a life of their own, seemingly somewhat disconnected from the usage and context Foucault himself developed them in. Foucault (and his work) has been the subject of an immense and vast number of discussions, writings, and books, both concerning himself and his works, but also concerning the application of them in a number of other Je n'écris pas pour un public, j'écris pour des utilisateurs (I don't write for an audience, I write for users)Michel Foucault, Dits et écrits, vol. II, 524.

The article analyzes the role of trade in the constitution of the modern state in 17th century England. The article focuses on the metaphor of the body politic and especially the ideas on circulation from William Harvey and how these can be used to analyze Thomas Hobbes’ ideas on trade and circulation in Leviathan and the economic thought of William Petty. Harvey’s thoughts on circulation were revolutionary and highly influential on the political and economic thoughts of the time. Even though Hobbes is mainly focused on law and sovereignty, he still characterizes circulation and trade as a vital motion, not subject to the will of the sovereign. Combined with his notion that the sovereign is the holder of an office, who must administer the wellbeing of the state, this opens up for the analysis that what the sovereign is administering is in reality the necessary motions of trade and the economy in general. This is also seen in one of the most prominent of the mercantilist economic thinkers of the age, William Petty, who in his economic thinking contributed to the constitution of the economy as a given field with a given logic which the ruler could not fundamentally change, but had to understand and act in accordance with in order to govern well.