Introduction: “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
“Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick first appeared in Administrative Theory & Praxis, Vol. 26, No. 1 (March 2004), published by Taylor & Francis. This influential article bridges biopolitical theory and critical theory, proposing that the patterns of dominance, hierarchy, and submission so central to Frankfurt School critical thought may also be biologically ingrained in human nature. Meyer-Emerick draws upon evolutionary political science—particularly the work of Somit and Peterson—to argue that predispositions toward authority and obedience are not merely social constructions but possibly rooted in genetic legacy. She juxtaposes this with Foucault’s conception of biopolitics, emphasizing how power operates over biological life to create self-regulating, compliant subjects. The paper further incorporates Elisabeth Noelle-Neumann’s “spiral of silence” to demonstrate how fear of social isolation can suppress dissent and reinforce dominant ideologies. Significantly, the article challenges the artificial divide between biology and political thought, urging public administration to integrate biopolitical insights for a more comprehensive understanding of bureaucratic dominance and false consciousness. In literary theory and critical scholarship, this work deepens interpretations of hegemony, not as solely ideological, but as a condition intertwined with human evolutionary behavior, thus complicating the emancipatory ambitions of critical praxis.
Summary of “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
🔍 1. Linking Biopolitics and Critical Theory
- Meyer-Emerick explores the intersection of biopolitical theory and critical theory, suggesting that domination and false consciousness may stem not only from social constructs but also from evolutionary traits.
- ⬩ “Critical theorists were accurate in their analysis of the domination and control that fosters false consciousness and one-dimensional life” (Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 1).
- ⬩ She aims to show that “bureaucratic pathology… may be deeply rooted in human nature” (p. 1).
🧬 2. Evolutionary Roots of Obedience and Hierarchy
- Humans may have inherited tendencies toward hierarchy, submission, and obedience.
- ⬩ “We may have ‘a genetic bias towards hierarchy, dominance, and submission’” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 1).
- ⬩ “Disobedience is a rarely encountered political phenomenon” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, p. 70).
📺 3. Spiral of Silence and Media Control (Noelle-Neumann)
- The media contributes to social conformity by silencing dissenting voices through fear of isolation.
- ⬩ “People suffer so much when they sense others avoiding them that they can be ‘manipulated as easily by their own sensitivity as by a bridle’” (Noelle-Neumann, 1993, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 2).
- ⬩ The spiral of silence “preserved…by the individual’s fear of isolation and…demand…that we conform” (p. 7).
📚 4. Critical Theory’s Emphasis on False Consciousness
- Based in Frankfurt School thought, critical theory asserts that capitalism manufactures false consciousness through media, administration, and bureaucracy.
- ⬩ “One-dimensionality…prevents people from freely pursuing their own interests” (Marcuse, 1964, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 3).
- ⬩ “Administration…reflects some form of domination” (p. 3).
🏛️ 5. Biopolitics from Political Science vs. Foucault
- Political science-based biopolitics emphasizes genetic predispositions and biological evolution.
- Foucault’s concept focuses on how power regulates life via governmentality and knowledge production.
- ⬩ “Power is situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race” (Foucault, 1978, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 4).
- ⬩ “Government gained more knowledge about individuals and therefore had greater power over them” (p. 3–4).
🧠 6. Bureaucracy and Domination
- Bureaucracy is viewed as a self-reinforcing mechanism of control, aligning with both critical theory and biopolitical insights.
- ⬩ “The more there is, the more we need it…administrative agencies fill the gap that they themselves create” (p. 4).
- ⬩ Bureaucrats are less likely to critique their own role due to benefits they gain from the system (p. 4).
🧬 7. Challenges of Applying Biopolitics
- Biopolitics remains marginal in public administration due to resistance from ideological, religious, and methodological camps.
- ⬩ “Many…do not believe in or have serious doubts about evolution” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, p. 102).
- ⬩ “Public administration…difficult to identify a mainstream at all” (Losco, 1994, as cited on p. 9).
🚫 8. Legacy and Misuse of Social Darwinism
- Misuse of evolutionary theory (e.g., Social Darwinism, racism, sexism) contributed to skepticism toward biological explanations in social sciences.
- ⬩ “Gross misappropriation…discredited Social Darwinism” (Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 10).
- ⬩ “Prejudiced generations of non-biological scholars against Darwin’s work” (Wahlke, 2001, as cited on p. 10).
💡 9. Potential for Emancipation and Practice
- Though somber, the paper ends with possibilities for change, referencing reciprocal altruism, cultural indoctrinability, and critical pedagogy.
- ⬩ “Reciprocal altruism…beneficial to them” (p. 11).
- ⬩ “Helper role…enlighten citizens and give them access to the policy dialogue” (Box, 1998, as cited on p. 12).
- ⬩ “Plurality of resistances…each of them a special case” (Foucault, 1978, p. 96).
Theoretical Terms/Concepts in “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
| 📘 Concept/Term | 🧠 Explanation | 📌 Example from Article | 📖 Supporting Quote with Citation |
| Biopolitics | The study of how biology and evolutionary traits shape political behavior and systems. | Public administration may reflect evolutionary predispositions toward obedience. | “Current research in biopolitics implies that the domination…may be deeply rooted in human nature.” (Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 1) |
| False Consciousness | A critical theory idea describing how individuals unknowingly accept and reinforce systems that oppress them. | Media promotes values that prevent people from recognizing their real interests. | “People are dominated by a false consciousness created…to preserve the hegemony of those in power.” (p. 3) |
| Hierarchy and Dominance | The idea that humans may be genetically predisposed to form and obey social hierarchies. | Social primates and humans exhibit hierarchical behaviors across history. | “Our species’ evolutionary history has left Homo sapiens genetically endowed with certain social and political behavioral tendencies.” (p. 4) |
| Spiral of Silence | A theory by Noelle-Neumann explaining how people stay silent to avoid isolation when they believe their views are unpopular. | Citizens self-censor opinions due to perceived media consensus. | “People suffer so much when they sense others avoiding them that they can be ‘manipulated as easily by their own sensitivity as by a bridle.’” (p. 2) |
| Authoritarian Personality | A psychological type identified by Adorno et al. marked by submission to authority and conventionalism, linked to support for fascist regimes. | Seen in both Nazi Germany and the U.S. context. | “Inclined to submit blindly to power and authority.” (Adorno et al., 1982, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 3) |
| One-Dimensionality | A concept from Herbert Marcuse describing individuals who are absorbed into consumer capitalist culture, unable to think critically or imagine alternatives. | People conform to media-driven life without questioning dominant narratives. | “This domination fosters a one-dimensionality…that prevents people from freely pursuing their own interests.” (p. 3) |
| Governmentality | Foucault’s term for the way modern states subtly manage populations by shaping behaviors and desires without overt force. | Citizens come to “self-discipline” in line with government goals. | “Government gained more knowledge about individuals and therefore had greater power over them.” (p. 4) |
| Docility / Indoctrinability | The idea that humans can adopt cultural norms that run counter to natural tendencies, allowing both conformity and resistance. | Celibacy as an example of overriding evolutionary drives. | “Our ability to act in accordance with cultural beliefs that actually run counter to…innate behavioral tendencies.” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, as cited on p. 11) |
| Reciprocal Altruism | A biological theory suggesting people help others with the expectation that the favor will be returned, supporting cooperation beyond kin. | Advocated as a human trait that supports ethical public administration. | “People recognize that aiding others is beneficial to them.” (p. 11) |
Contribution of “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick to Literary Theory/Theories
1. Contribution to Critical Theory (Frankfurt School)
- 📌 Integrates evolutionary explanations into Frankfurt School analysis of false consciousness, bureaucracy, and ideological control.
- 📖 “Critical theorists were accurate in their analysis of the domination and control that fosters false consciousness and one-dimensional life.” (Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 1)
- ⬩ Offers a naturalized basis for Marcuse’s idea of one-dimensionality by linking it to biological tendencies toward conformity and hierarchy.
- 📖 “This domination fosters a one-dimensionality…that prevents people from freely pursuing their own interests.” (p. 3)
- ⬩ Supports Adorno’s concept of the authoritarian personality by situating it within evolutionary behavior.
- 📖 “Inclined to submit blindly to power and authority.” (Adorno et al., 1982, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 3)
📚 2. Contribution to Ideology and Subject Formation
- 📌 Extends Althusserian ideas of interpellation by explaining how obedience and conformity may stem not just from ideology but also from biological predispositions.
- 📖 “Our species’ evolutionary history has left Homo sapiens genetically endowed with certain social and political behavioral tendencies.” (p. 4)
- ⬩ Proposes that subjects may be biologically conditioned to accept their roles in dominant systems, reinforcing the illusory freedom often critiqued in literary texts.
📺 3. Contribution to Media Theory (Spiral of Silence and Cultural Reproduction)
- 📌 Noelle-Neumann’s spiral of silence complements media studies and poststructural literary theory by showing how media shapes social norms and discursive silence.
- 📖 “People suffer so much when they sense others avoiding them that they can be ‘manipulated as easily by their own sensitivity as by a bridle.’” (p. 2)
- ⬩ Contributes to theories of hegemony (e.g., Gramsci) and media control in literature by explaining why dissent is often muted in characters and real-world readers.
🧬 4. Contribution to Posthumanism and Biopolitics in Literature
- 📌 Incorporates Foucault’s biopolitics, linking it with natural sciences, encouraging literary scholars to read texts through biological regimes of power.
- 📖 “Power is situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race.” (Foucault, 1978, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, 2004, p. 4)
- ⬩ Emphasizes biopower and population control as key interpretive frameworks in literature exploring health, governance, and surveillance.
🧠 5. Contribution to Evolutionary Literary Theory
- 📌 Offers a nuanced challenge to purely culturalist interpretations by introducing evolutionary political behavior as relevant to literary character development and plot.
- 📖 “Social primates display dominance behavior; in every instance so far observed, they also live in hierarchical social…structures.” (p. 6)
- ⬩ Suggests that human characters’ tendencies toward hierarchy, submission, or rebellion in literature may mirror evolved survival strategies.
🕊️ 6. Implications for Resistance and Literary Emancipation
- 📌 Reinvigorates the notion of emancipatory potential in literature by locating it within human idiosyncrasy and capacity for cultural override.
- 📖 “It is the idiosyncrasies of individuals within the species population where the greatest potential for ‘immanent critique’ and emancipation may persist.” (p. 11)
- ⬩ Encourages critical literary theory to look for moments where characters override biological or social programming, echoing Marcuse’s Great Refusal.
🔍 Conclusion: Literary Theory’s Expanded Terrain
Meyer-Emerick’s article pushes literary theory toward a cross-disciplinary expansion—inviting scholars to engage evolution, biology, psychology, and public administration theory in their analyses of power, ideology, and subjectivity. Her work provides a new biopolitical foundation to long-standing literary debates on freedom, conformity, and resistance.
Examples of Critiques Through “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
| 📚 Literary Work (Year) | 🧠 Critique Through Meyer-Emerick’s Framework | 📖 Relevant Theoretical Lens | 📌 Article-Based Reference |
| 📘 The Testaments by Margaret Atwood (2019) | The novel exposes indoctrinability and false consciousness within Gilead, where women internalize oppression. Aunt Lydia’s role reflects both biopolitical governance and self-disciplining power structures. | – False Consciousness– Governmentality– Docility | “People are dominated by a false consciousness… perpetuated by capitalism… via administration.” (Meyer-Emerick, p. 3) |
| 📗 Klara and the Sun by Kazuo Ishiguro (2021) | The novel explores docility and the idea of the “obedient body” through the AI Klara, echoing human submission to dominant orders. It reflects Foucault’s anatomo-politics and the looping effects of bureaucracy. | – Obedience– Biopower– Bureaucratic Control | “Power is situated… at the level of life, the species, the race.” (Foucault, as cited in Meyer-Emerick, p. 4) |
| 📕 Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow by Gabrielle Zevin (2022) | The characters’ conformity to capitalist creativity norms reveals the tension between individual identity and market-driven false consciousness, shaped by media success and isolation fears—paralleling the spiral of silence. | – Spiral of Silence– One-Dimensionality– Media and Opinion Control | “They conform rather than challenge the prevailing order and risk isolation.” (Meyer-Emerick, p. 2) |
| 📙 Yellowface by R.F. Kuang (2023) | The protagonist’s desperate assimilation and manipulation of public opinion reflects fear of exclusion, echoing Noelle-Neumann’s spiral of silence and Meyer-Emerick’s argument that public identity is mediated by social and media dynamics. | – Spiral of Silence– Media Hegemony– Fear of Isolation | “The existing order is preserved… by the public’s demand…that we conform to established opinions.” (Meyer-Emerick, p. 7) |
Criticism Against “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
⚠️ 1. Biological Determinism and Reductionism
- ⛔ Critics argue the paper leans toward biological essentialism, suggesting human behaviors like obedience or hierarchy are genetically hardwired.
- 🧬 This may risk reducing complex political, cultural, and literary phenomena to biological instincts.
- 📌 “Humans have an ‘innate inclination to obey.’” (Eibl-Eibesfeldt, as cited, p. 6) – such claims risk ignoring social variability and context.
📉 2. Undermines Agency and Emancipation
- ⚠️ By attributing false consciousness and social conformity to evolutionary history, the paper could weaken the critical theory tradition’s belief in human agency.
- 🙅♂️ This challenges the Frankfurt School’s goal of emancipation through awareness, implying that resistance may be unnatural or rare.
- 📌 “Disobedience is a rarely encountered political phenomenon.” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, as cited, p. 6)
💬 3. Limited Engagement with Literary or Cultural Theory
- ❓ The paper’s theoretical framework is not explicitly applied to literary or cultural texts, limiting its direct contribution to literary theory.
- 📚 Although it references critical theory and Foucault, it misses an opportunity to connect with literary discourse such as narrative theory, genre, or representation.
🧪 4. Scientific Controversies in Biopolitics
- ❗ The reliability of biopolitical claims about human nature is contested in evolutionary science and social science alike.
- 🧠 Scholars like Corning (2000) and Wilson (1998) warn that behavioral genetics is still in its infancy and not ready to support strong social claims.
- 📌 “Our behaviors are greatly affected by social pressures… not solely biology.” (Corning, 2000, p. 104)
🧨 5. Historical Baggage of Social Darwinism
- ⚠️ Any linkage between evolutionary biology and human social behavior risks echoing Social Darwinism, a historically discredited ideology.
- 🧑🔬 Despite her disclaimers, Meyer-Emerick’s paper revives dangerous framings of hierarchy as ‘natural’, even if unintentionally.
- 📌 “This gross misappropriation eventually, and fortunately, discredited Social Darwinism.” (p. 10)
🧩 6. Conceptual Incoherence Between Theories
- 🔀 Merging Foucault’s historical, post-structuralist analysis with biopolitical evolutionary science creates tensions, as these frameworks are epistemologically distinct.
- 🌀 Foucault analyzes power as relational and discursive, not innate or biologically determined.
- 📌 “Foucault’s theory is different in that he restricts his analysis…to historical analysis versus specific behavioral examination.” (p. 4)
Representative Quotations from “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick with Explanation
| 🔖 Quotation | 💡 Explanation / Theoretical Insight |
| “Critical theorists were accurate in their analysis of the domination and control that fosters false consciousness and one-dimensional life.” (p. 1) | Affirms that Frankfurt School critiques of capitalism align with biological insights into human obedience and conformity. |
| “We may have ‘a genetic bias towards hierarchy, dominance, and submission.’” (Somit & Peterson, 1997, as cited on p. 1) | Introduces biopolitical theory suggesting dominance structures may be hardwired through evolution, not just socially constructed. |
| “People suffer so much when they sense others avoiding them that they can be ‘manipulated as easily by their own sensitivity as by a bridle.’” (p. 2) | From Noelle-Neumann’s spiral of silence theory—fear of social isolation compels individuals to self-censor and conform. |
| “Administration… reflects some form of domination.” (p. 3) | Highlights critical theory’s view of bureaucracy as a mechanism that perpetuates inequality and false consciousness. |
| “Power is situated and exercised at the level of life, the species, the race.” (Foucault, 1978, as cited on p. 4) | Captures Foucault’s concept of biopolitics—how modern power disciplines populations through biology and life itself. |
| “Hierarchy is the most pervasive; for almost all of us, the major and minor events of our existence occur within, and we are shaped by, one hierarchy or another.” (p. 6) | Emphasizes the argument that hierarchy is not just a social system, but a deep-seated pattern of behavior across human experience. |
| “Disobedience is a rarely encountered political phenomenon.” (p. 6) | Indicates evolutionary explanations for political passivity and widespread compliance with authority. |
| “The existing order is preserved… by the public’s demand… that we conform to established opinions and behaviors.” (p. 7) | Reinforces how public opinion and mass culture enforce conformity and discourage resistance—core to both critical and biopolitical theory. |
| “To draw premature closure to biopolitics… would represent an abandonment of a scholar’s time honoured defence of freedom of inquiry.” (p. 11) | Defends the integration of biology into political theory and warns against rejecting it due to past ideological misuses (e.g., Social Darwinism). |
| “It is the idiosyncrasies of individuals within the species population where the greatest potential for ‘immanent critique’ and emancipation may persist.” (p. 11) | Suggests hope for resistance and transformation lies not in mass systems, but in unique human variance and cultural transcendence of biological instincts. |
Suggested Readings: “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory” by Nancy Meyer-Emerick
- Meyer-Emerick, Nancy. “Biopolitics, dominance, and critical theory.” Administrative Theory & Praxis 26.1 (2004): 1-15.
- Meyer-Emerick, Nancy. “Biopolitics, Dominance, and Critical Theory.” Administrative Theory & Praxis, vol. 26, no. 1, 2004, pp. 1–15. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/25610645. Accessed 26 July 2025.
- McMahon, John. “The ‘Enigma of Biopolitics’: Antiblackness, Modernity, and Roberto Esposito’s Biopolitics.” Political Theory, vol. 46, no. 5, 2018, pp. 749–71. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/26509631. Accessed 26 July 2025.
- Kelly, M. G. E. “International Biopolitics: Foucault, Globalisation and Imperialism.” Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, vol. 57, no. 123, 2010, pp. 1–26. JSTOR, http://www.jstor.org/stable/41802469. Accessed 26 July 2025.