Michel Foucault – Discipline and Punish (1975)

Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish is one of the most influential works of critical social analysis in the 20th century. Published in 1975, the book marks the beginning of Foucault’s “genealogical” phase and investigates the historical transformations of power, punishment, and subjectivity. At its core is the shift from corporal punishment to subtle, pervasive disciplinary techniques – and with it, a new understanding of modern forms of power. Foucault demonstrates how prisons, schools, barracks, and clinics not only exercise control but also produce the modern subject itself.

Scholarly and Historical Context

Discipline and Punish appeared during a time of intense social upheaval. The 1970s were marked by critiques of authoritarian institutions, police violence, and prison systems – not least in France, where Foucault himself was active (e.g. in the Groupe d’information sur les prisons). The book also represents a break from traditional historiography: Foucault’s method of “genealogy” does not follow a narrative of progress but reconstructs historical practices as outcomes of complex power constellations. The influence of Friedrich Nietzsche, particularly his Genealogy of Morality, is unmistakable.

Key Points

Central Question

Foucault asks how a new understanding of punishment and power emerged over the course of modernity. Why were public executions replaced by the prison system? How did society learn not just to punish individuals but to actively shape and discipline them?

From Spectacle to Discipline

The book opens with a stark contrast: the public execution of Damiens in 1757 – a bloody spectacle of corporal punishment. Foucault then describes the sober rules of a modern prison a hundred years later. This shift from physical to psychological control marks a new quality: punishment becomes depersonalized, bureaucratized, and increasingly an instrument for producing “normal” citizens. The punishment of the body is replaced by the “correction” of the mind.

Panopticism: The New Model of Power

At the center of Foucault’s analysis is the panopticon, a prison model devised by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham. This architectural design allows inmates to be potentially under constant observation – without knowing if they are actually being watched. The principle: visibility produces obedience. Foucault sees this as the paradigmatic model of modern power:

• Invisible observers – visible controlled subjects
• Internalization of surveillance – discipline through self-control
• Applicability to all institutions: schools, factories, hospitals, barracks, bureaucracies

Disciplinary Power, Normalization, and the “Docile Subject”

For Foucault, modern power is no longer primarily repressive but productive. It creates subjects by shaping bodies and behaviour. The individual becomes a “docile body” – trained, adaptable, and controllable. Rituals, schedules, evaluation systems, and norms all play central roles. Those who resist norms are not simply punished but labelled as deviant, surveilled, and corrected.

There is an interesting parallel with the sociology of Erving Goffman, particularly his concept of the “total institution”. Institutions like prisons, psychiatric hospitals, or barracks shape the behavior of inmates through rigid schedules, rules, and hierarchies – mirroring on a micro-sociological level what Foucault describes as disciplinary power.

Structuralism and Post-Structuralism Compared

To better situate Michel Foucault’s theoretical position, it helps to look at the fundamental differences between structuralism and post-structuralism. While structuralism seeks stable, universal patterns in language, culture, and society, post-structuralism emphasizes the instability of meanings, the historical contingency of knowledge, and the ubiquity of power.

Key differences between structuralism and post-structuralism – in terms of theory, conceptions of power, and methodological approaches.

Reception and Relevance

Discipline and Punish has had an impact far beyond sociology. It has been especially influential in criminology and sociology of punishment, where Foucault’s concepts of disciplinary power and institutional analysis offered new perspectives on prisons, criminal law, and deviance. The sociology of the body took up his idea that power relations are inscribed in bodily practices, disciplines, and routines. In policing studies and governance theory, Foucault contributed to critical approaches that analyze power as not only repressive but also productive and normalizing. His ideas also became central to gender studies and queer theory, particularly in exploring how subjectivity is produced through discourses and norms – as in the work of Judith Butler.

Foucault’s ideas also connect fruitfully with other sociological theories:

• Pierre Bourdieu shares with Foucault the view that power is not only exercised openly but is embedded in symbols, practices, and social structures. Foucault’s concept of disciplinary power can be related to Bourdieu’s ideas of symbolic violence and habitus formation – for example, when individuals internalize social norms without being aware of their heteronomy.
• Erving Goffman explored the concept of the total institution (e.g. prisons, psychiatric hospitals, barracks) as places where individuals are subjected to comprehensive regimes of control and surveillance. His studies on stigma and social identity align well with Foucault’s analysis of disciplinary practices.
• Norbert Elias described in his theory of civilization long-term processes of self-control and behavioural regulation that result in an inner compulsion toward conformity. This development of the “civilized” subject closely parallels Foucault’s notion of discipline, especially regarding the internalization of social norms.
• Niklas Luhmann takes a very different theoretical approach but also examines how control operates in complex societies – in his case not through actors but through systems that structure communication. Foucault’s concept of dispositifs or discourses can be productively compared with Luhmann’s theory of functional differentiation.

Foucault’s approach has also been critiqued, especially for offering an all-encompassing analysis of power without a normative alternative. If power permeates all social spheres – from language to self-perception – how can resistance, emancipation, or visions of a just society even be conceived? Foucault himself offers no clear answers, but this is also the strength of his theory: Many of his readers – for example in queer theory, disability studies, or postcolonial theory – have drawn from his diagnoses of power relations to develop new forms of critical practice and empowerment.

Contemporary Relevance

From Surveillance to Self-Optimization

Foucault’s analysis is more relevant than ever. The shift he describes from repressive to disciplinary power can be observed today in many forms – especially in the digital realm. Panoptic principles no longer operate just in prisons or schools but permeate everyday practices, media use, and even consumption patterns.

A key example is the phenomenon of social scoring and self-tracking. In China, for example, the state is experimenting with a comprehensive social credit system that evaluates citizens’ behavior based on obedience, creditworthiness, or conformity – rewarding or punishing accordingly. Similar tendencies can be seen in the West: step counters, sleep trackers, and health apps promote a self-optimization that relies on constant monitoring and norm compliance – often voluntarily, but still effective.

Algorithms, Prediction, and Digital Discipline

Foucault’s insights are also applicable in security and policing research. Predictive policing – using algorithms to forecast crimes – shifts the focus from reacting to specific offenses to proactively managing risk zones and groups. This raises questions about how control, power, and discrimination recombine when decisions are made not by humans but by “black boxes.” The concept of surveillance capitalism (Shoshana Zuboff) extends Foucault’s reflections to digital business models in which behaviour itself becomes a commodity.

Platforms like Amazon, Google, or Instagram also function as normative disciplining systems through likes, ratings, KPI logics (Key Performance Indicators). They define what is “visible,” “successful,” or “normal” – and what is not. Users internalize these metrics and adapt their behavior to maximize reach, visibility, or social approval.

Nudging and the New Subtlety of Power

Behavioral governance (or nudging) has also become increasingly important in politics and business. Through nudging, gamification, and transparency strategies, people are motivated toward “better” behavior – e.g. CO₂ displays on electricity bills or progress bars in donation campaigns. These techniques are subtle but effective – perfectly in line with Foucault’s ideas: they replace coercion with steering, repression with involvement.

Governmentality and Neoliberal Self-Governance

Foucault’s later work on governmentality deepens this perspective: Modern power no longer operates primarily through prohibitions but by activating and steering subjects’ self-regulation. The individual is not only disciplined but learns to regulate themselves in line with social expectations – in health behavior, lifestyle choices, or consumption. This concept has had significant influence on analyses of neoliberal power relations.

Relevance for Policing Contexts

Foucault’s work is especially relevant for policing contexts. It raises awareness of the line between legitimate control and authoritarian abuse of power. It shows how norms arise, how behavior is labelled, and how social deviance is produced. It thus provides an important tool for critical reflection on the role of police, state, and society in dealing with deviance, order, and security.

Conclusion

With Discipline and Punish, Michel Foucault offers a radical critique of modern institutions. He demonstrates how power is embedded in routines, architectures, discourses, and norms – not merely repressing but producing. The work has fundamentally transformed our understanding of punishment, discipline, and subjectivity, and remains essential reading for anyone seeking to understand power relations in modernity.

Discipline and Punish marks the starting point for a series of Foucault’s key works that further explore mechanisms of power and knowledge. Particularly relevant are The Order of Discourse (1971), The History of SexualityA broad term encompassing sexual orientation, behavior, identity, and desire. (from 1976 onward), and The Will to Knowledge, in which Foucault investigates new forms of biopolitics, technologies of the self, and discursive subjectivation.

References

• Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Pantheon.
• Foucault, M. (1994). The Order of Discourse. In: Young, R. (ed.), Untying the Text: A Post-Structuralist Reader. Boston: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
• Flynn, T. (2005). Foucault’s Mapping of History. In: Gutting, G. (ed.): The Cambridge Companion to Foucault. Cambridge University Press.