Hidden contexts and invisible power relations: A Foucauldian reading of diversity research

Abstract

This article joins recent critical diversity studies that point to an urgent need to revitalize the field, but goes further by showing the inherent contextual issues and power relations that frame existing contributions. Based on a theoretical reading inspired by Michel Foucault, diversity is presented as discourse that is not independent of the particular research exercise of which it is part but, rather, remains contingent on the prevailing forms of knowledge and choices made by researchers. By attending to more refined understandings of power and context within diversity discourse, this article makes visible and calls into question the categorization and normalization of diversity and its management. It contributes to existing research by suggesting that the knowledge produced by mainstream and critical diversity scholars alike is biopolitical and governmental. To do diversity research differently or ‘otherwise’ requires finding ways to develop theorizations and practices that turn this modality of power against itself.

Introduction: Poverty, Power and Inequality

“…Here they may find equal status in some modes, for instance as voters, women or workers, but not in all aspects of equality -millions of women of colour who work and vote continue to suffer structural violence, and growing masses of informal sector workers are still subjected to abusive conditions and unequal services with limited recourse to justice. Invisible power continues to label and position people in a taxonomy of differential entitlement, even as they are welcomed into citizenship, the market economy and multicultural society (Ahonen et al 2014;Hickey and du Toit 2007;Phillips 2011).…”

Converging logics? Managing migration and managing diversity

“…Their broad distinction between those critical diversity management scholars who work with a notion of power as held by a ruling group versus those who understand power as all-encompassing and circulating, does not specify 'which Foucault', but hints at his earlier conception of 'microphysics of power' that formed the prelude for his notion of governmentality (Walters 2012, 14). Based on my own review of the critical literature of both diversity and migration management, I would suggest that much of this work has drawn on both early and late Foucault, with a governmentality framework emerging as a particularly salient way to analyse the workings of diversity and migration management (Gordon 1995;Kalm 2010;Prügl 2011;Geiger and Pécoud 2013;Ahonen et al 2014;Scheel and Ratfisch 2014 Their article highlights the ways in which the UNHCR has embraced and fostered a migration management logic that is both embedded in and producing categorisations of 'migrants', differentiating between so-called genuine refugees and illegal migrants (2014,938). Their focus on the effect of categorisations could have fruitful points of connection with Floya Anthias' study of integration and diversity discourses in the UK and Europe more broadly, which emphasises a differentiation between 'salient' and problematic differences (2013, 327;cf.…”

Inspiration and Insinuation Influences on Human Thinking and Behavior: A Psychoanalytical, Psychodynamic, and Cognitive Phenomenon

“…Even wrong policies i.e. politically motivated policies of individuals and states have never being diagnosed clinically, nonetheless, theoretically addressed by another fairly induced psychopath through claimed research findings or otherwise (kindly see Ahonen et al, 2014 about hidden context and invisible power on diversity). The vicious circle of pathological problems continues indicating that humans are limited in all forms including setting of standard of behavior.…”

“…As stated by Ahonen et al (2014) that was a result of human beings natural power relation internalized by individuals, as well as those that guide the behavior of population "biopolitics". In our words, it means that human beings are naturally inclined to be excessive or inaccurate in all their dealings.…”