Hi, so nice to hear from a former student after all this time. It's really commendable that you're reacquainting yourself with these concepts. I'm trying to channel Monsieur Foucault and this is what I think he would say: "I don't know too much about these moves by Australian politicians. The moves certainly seem to increase the level of direct surveillance by the state (which resembles the panopticon) and inculcate a culture of surveillance among citizens (which does not resemble the panopticon, but may nevertheless be even more effective). However, what if I said that this system still would not provide perfect surveillance? In the perfect system of surveillance, we carry out surveillance on ourselves; we become docile subjects without need of external surveillance." That, I believe is what Foucault might say. But I guess, as a sociology professor who taught me once said, 'it depends on which Foucault you’re talking about'. The experts, like my professor, say that Foucault’s opinions changed over the years. Likewise, I think Foucault not only admitted to, but enthusiastically championed, the fact that his opinions changed. I’m looking for a great quotation in which he explains why his opinions change, but I can’t find it. So here's another good one: "The main interest in life and work is to become someone else that you were not in the beginning." Obviously, that's what you're trying to do by studying and that’s also keeps me interested in my academic life!

Yes, it's funny. Even academics need to 'juice' the numbers by which our work is measured in various ways. But that's exactly what makes measurability so relevant. It's become part-and-parcel of work. More importantly, it has spread from work into our 'personal' lives. At the gym, for instance, people weigh themselves, hop on a treadmill, measure their heartbeat and calories burned, record the weights they lift, post the numbers on social media, then count how many 'likes' they get. And it's not always the case that neoliberalism fails miserably. Almost all athletes today improve their performance using these principles. This is why (according to the argument) in all the sports competitions I know about today's competitors would easily beat the champions of twenty years ago.

Interesting question. First thing to say is that in Australia, there are many ways for men to walk, and the macho and dad walk are different. At least, that's what I think as a dad! Anyway, the standard answer is that your experience of walking would alter your subjective world. By, e.g. sticking your chest and arms out, you inhabit and experience the world differently. Certain feminist authors would also emphasize physiological difference. In her "Oedipus and the Devil", Roper writes that sexual organs, childbirth, shoulder size, pelvis size etc. matter. So a female doing a man walk experiences the walk itself differently to the way a male does. I think Roper's argument might be controversial today, but I'm not sure because I've reached the limits of my knowledge of scholarship on this fascinating subject 😅

Good for you! 👏

Great. I hope you did well and continue studying!

Hola mi amigo. I just corrected the English subtitles and the added Spanish (Latin America). Can you let me know if that works? Saludos desde Melbourne, Australia!

"Culture and habit"? I could be convinced. But how would you convince sociologists and anthropologists to go along with it?

Thanks for the kind response Keely!

tbh I've only read him on Neoliberalism, but now I'm interested in reading his other work! Thanks for the recommendation.

Glad to help.

Well thanks for the kind comment. And may I say, in the spirit of reciprocity; back at 'ya!

Hi Xiang Ran Liu; sorry by 'specific' I think I should have said 'balanced'. For some reason, I think I have fallen into a habit of using the term "specific" when referring to "balanced reciprocity". Thanks for picking me up on this. I'll change info for the video to reflect that!